Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 8/2/2009 6:39:52 PM EST
Proof we will be surrendering soon.



French general takes over NATO command in Virginia
By SLOBODAN LEKIC (AP)

BRUSSELS — In an unprecedented move, a French general will take over a key NATO command in Norfolk, Virginia, charged with transforming the Europe-centered Cold War alliance to tackle today's global challenges, NATO said Wednesday.

Gen. Stephane Abrial of the French Air Force will take over from U.S. Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis as NATO's commander in charge of military modernization, the alliance said in a statement.

The position has traditionally been held by a four-star U.S. general. Abrial's appointment marks the first time in NATO's 60-year history that a non-American officer has been appointed to fill the position.

"For NATO this is unprecedented," alliance spokesman James Appathurai said. "It is a manifestation of the French return to the military structure, and also of France's importance to NATO's future because the (Norfolk) command will help shape the alliance in the 21st century."

The Transformation Command in Norfolk is the only strategic command within the 28-nation alliance that is headquartered in North America.

Abrial is currently chief-of-staff of the French Air Force. He will take up his new duties on Sept. 9 at a ceremony in Norfolk, the statement said.

Abrial is the second French general to assume a top NATO command since France formally rejoined the alliance in April. Earlier this month, Gen. Philippe Stoltz took charge of NATO's rapid reaction force headquarters in Lisbon, Portugal.

President Nicolas Sarkozy was promised the two commands in April at NATO's 60th anniversary summit in Strasbourg, France, after Paris rejoined NATO's military command, a decision-making body within the U.S.-dominated alliance.

France also has stressed that in return for bringing its military back to NATO's integrated military command, it wants the U.S. to drop its objections to the European Union developing an independent defense role. Washington — backed by Britain and some other European nations — has long been wary of France's military ambitions for the EU, seeing it as a threat to NATO unity.

In 1966, French President Charles de Gaulle abruptly pulled his country out of the NATO command and evicted all allied troops and bases, including its military headquarters, in an effort to assert France's sovereignty over its own territory. Although France remained a NATO member, it stayed outside the alliance's decision-making core.

NATO has two strategic commands, Allied Command Operations in Belgium, which oversees all military operations, and Allied Transformation Command in the United States, which conducts training, and develops and improves military capabilities for the Alliance.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jnJYwxA9eKTf29yHjZ3FD5Ex_MxwD99OADD00
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 6:40:58 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 6:44:39 PM EST
How many white flags do you have to hoist to become a general in France?
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 6:45:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By molotov357:
How many white flags do you have to hoist to become a general in France?

How many?
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 6:46:02 PM EST
No one could pose less of a threat.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 6:46:28 PM EST
After what happened to their population(namely men of fighting age) it isn't much wonder they didn't put up much of a fight in WW2. Not to mention whoever built the Maginot Line forgot to fill up a hole...

But I have no issue with the French currently. They will do what is needed when the time comes to it(they have killed quite a few pirates without giving a shit IIRC) and their soldiers are respected. Don't confuse their military leadership with their political leadership.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 7:10:48 PM EST
Originally Posted By molotov357:
How many white flags do you have to hoist to become a general in France?


All of them.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 7:13:28 PM EST
Originally Posted By cableguy221:
After what happened to their population(namely men of fighting age) it isn't much wonder they didn't put up much of a fight in WW2. Not to mention whoever built the Maginot Line forgot to fill up a hole...

But I have no issue with the French currently. They will do what is needed when the time comes to it(they have killed quite a few pirates without giving a shit IIRC) and their soldiers are respected. Don't confuse their military leadership with their political leadership.


Point taken. However, isn't it true that the higher the rank of an officer (in any army) the more closely they mirror the attitudes of the political leadership?
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 7:19:56 PM EST
Having worked with the french in the 80s....the stigma is not justified. They also went in with us in Gulf War 1.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 7:20:05 PM EST
The French Naval Ensign for the 18th Century actually was a plain, white flag.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_flag
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 7:51:50 PM EST
Originally Posted By Strykewolf:
Having worked with the french in the 80s....the stigma is not justified. They also went in with us in Gulf War 1.

I have only heard positive feedback from soldiers who have worked with French soldiers.

Apparently they have really good MRE's as well.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 8:16:52 PM EST


First Nobama now the French.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 8:22:44 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/2/2009 8:23:25 PM EST by NimmerMehr]
So an officer from a NATO member is assigned a position on a NATO command....

I must be missing something as I do not feel any resentment or anger because of this.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 8:44:02 PM EST
Political move.

I highly doubt some frog air force general is the best guy to modernize NATO's forces.

France just wants to play with the big boys again.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 8:44:55 PM EST
Originally Posted By cableguy221:
Originally Posted By Strykewolf:
Having worked with the french in the 80s....the stigma is not justified. They also went in with us in Gulf War 1.

I have only heard positive feedback from soldiers who have worked with French soldiers.

Apparently they have really good MRE's as well.


What's ironic is that the French got a rep for being solid soldiers while the manly Germans came off as fat, lazy, and rather unprofessional in this current war.

Weird.
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 8:47:17 PM EST
It's a NATO command assignment........not a US command assignment.

When they announce they are handing over command of an American Brigade to
a general officer from another country then I will start asking WTF!
Link Posted: 8/2/2009 9:23:01 PM EST
Now if they would only bring their hot womenz over with them and when they leave take our ugly ones with them.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 4:52:22 AM EST

Originally Posted By NimmerMehr:
So an officer from a NATO member is assigned a position on a NATO command....

I must be missing something as I do not feel any resentment or anger because of this.

No it's because they backed out of NATO from a force projection role and kicked out all of the troops in the past. For some unknown reason, they were allowed a seat at the table still, and now this.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 4:56:57 AM EST
haha
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 5:07:20 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/3/2009 5:07:59 AM EST by sherrick13]
The French have more balls than we do right now.

I'd probably accept a Frenchie as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at this point.

I would definately trade Sarko for our impostor CinC right now.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 5:13:40 AM EST
Originally Posted By sherrick13:
The French have more balls than we do right now.

I'd probably accept a Frenchie as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at this point.

I would definately trade Sarko for our impostor CinC right now.


So you're saying the US Military has no balls?
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 5:28:17 AM EST
Originally Posted By DLoken:
Originally Posted By sherrick13:
The French have more balls than we do right now.

I'd probably accept a Frenchie as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at this point.

I would definately trade Sarko for our impostor CinC right now.


So you're saying the US Military has no balls?


He's saying the spineless elected officials who control them are...
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:12:07 AM EST
Oh, look at the ignorant French bashing by the idiot AFCOM members.

None of them know:

1. the French helped during the American Revolution;
2. US black Army soldiers were assigned to the French Army in WWI.

No. Their lives are all about chest thumping.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:15:18 AM EST
Originally Posted By JoePatriot:
Originally Posted By DLoken:
Originally Posted By sherrick13:
The French have more balls than we do right now.

I'd probably accept a Frenchie as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at this point.

I would definately trade Sarko for our impostor CinC right now.


So you're saying the US Military has no balls?


He's saying the spineless elected officials who control them are...


"I'd probably accept a Frenchie as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at this point. "

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is a civilian post now?
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:29:46 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/3/2009 6:30:34 AM EST by sterling18]
Originally Posted By bcochran:
Oh, look at the ignorant French bashing by the idiot AFCOM members.

None of them know:

1. the French helped during the American Revolution;
2. US black Army soldiers were assigned to the French Army in WWI.

No. Their lives are all about chest thumping.


Continue on with the history lesson then.

What about;

<<The unity of NATO was breached early in its history, with a crisis occurring during Charles de Gaulle's presidency of France from 1958 onwards. De Gaulle protested at the United States' strong role in the organization and what he perceived as a special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. In a memorandum sent to President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Prime Minister Harold Macmillan on 17 September 1958, he argued for the creation of a tripartite directorate that would put France on an equal footing with the United States and the United Kingdom, and also for the expansion of NATO's coverage to include geographical areas of interest to France, most notably Algeria, where France was waging a counter-insurgency and sought NATO assistance.

Considering the response given to be unsatisfactory, de Gaulle began to build an independent defence for his country. He also wanted to give France, in the event of an East German incursion into West Germany, the option of coming to a separate peace with the Eastern bloc instead of being drawn into a NATO-Warsaw Pact global war. On 11 March 1959, France withdrew its Mediterranean fleet from NATO command; three months later, in June 1959, de Gaulle banned the stationing of foreign nuclear weapons on French soil. This caused the United States to transfer two hundred military aircraft out of France and return control of the ten major air force bases that had operated in France since 1950 to the French by 1967.>>

So the french decided they wanted a back door out and throw the alliance under the bus with a seperate peace with the Eastern bloc instead of fighing with NATO if it came to a shoot match.

You're missing some chapters in your history books.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:49:19 AM EST
Originally Posted By SteveV:
Originally Posted By cableguy221:
After what happened to their population(namely men of fighting age) it isn't much wonder they didn't put up much of a fight in WW2. Not to mention whoever built the Maginot Line forgot to fill up a hole...

But I have no issue with the French currently. They will do what is needed when the time comes to it(they have killed quite a few pirates without giving a shit IIRC) and their soldiers are respected. Don't confuse their military leadership with their political leadership.


Point taken. However, isn't it true that the higher the rank of an officer (in any army) the more closely they mirror the attitudes of the political leadership?


Assumptions are fun!
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 7:04:38 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/3/2009 2:50:09 PM EST by ScrapHeap]
Originally Posted By bcochran:
Oh, look at the ignorant French bashing by the idiot AFCOM members.

None of them know:

1. the French helped during the American Revolution;
2. US black Army soldiers were assigned to the French Army in WWI.

No. Their lives are all about chest thumping.


They wanted to invade the U.S. during our (Civil?) War by pushing up through Mexico!

They better not screw this up.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 7:07:14 AM EST
Originally Posted By DLoken:
Originally Posted By sherrick13:
The French have more balls than we do right now.

I'd probably accept a Frenchie as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at this point.

I would definately trade Sarko for our impostor CinC right now.


So you're saying the US Military has no balls?


He's talking about decision-making elites brought in by the feckless loser we call a President.


And you know damn well what he was referring to.


- BG
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 7:15:27 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 7:17:09 AM EST
NATO.. is a joint military command...

we had british, canadian and italian navy officers serving within our units when i was in.. saluted and took orders from them as allied officers. people pushing the "ohthenoes" button again

when blue helmets start walking our city streets then you can worry.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 7:17:10 AM EST
when in the history of this earth since Napoleon has it been a good idea to put a French general in charge of ANYTHING?
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 7:18:31 AM EST
It's NATO. What has kept them from having foreign officials run their command centers in the past?
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 7:22:28 AM EST
Could this mean better cuisine for our troops.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 2:28:05 PM EST
Originally Posted By DLoken:
Originally Posted By sherrick13:
The French have more balls than we do right now.

I'd probably accept a Frenchie as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at this point.

I would definately trade Sarko for our impostor CinC right now.


So you're saying the US Military has no balls?



Like you even want a strong .mil?

Go blow your fake liberal induced smoke somewhere else.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:16:30 PM EST
Originally Posted By thexrayboy:

When they announce they are handing over command of an American Brigade to
a general officer from another country then I will start asking WTF!


Like they did in Kosovo?

Or Afghanistan?

NTM
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:21:50 PM EST
C'est la vie
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:24:56 PM EST
Originally Posted By Strykewolf:
Having worked with the french in the 80s....the stigma is not justified. They also went in with us in Gulf War 1.


The French are actually good soldiers. I have worked with them in Iraq in GW1. Lucky bastards got to wear shorts, had kickass MRE's and were very motivates and professional.

The problem with France is the politicians. NOT their military.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:26:02 PM EST
Originally Posted By texas_mustang_01:
Political move.

I highly doubt some frog air force general is the best guy to modernize NATO's forces.

France just wants to play with the big boys again.


They have been killing AQ with the big boys in Afghanistan for some time now.
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:27:14 PM EST
Originally Posted By bcochran:
Oh, look at the ignorant French bashing by the idiot AFCOM members.

None of them know:

1. the French helped during the American Revolution;
2. US black Army soldiers were assigned to the French Army in WWI.

No. Their lives are all about chest thumping.


Kiss off
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:30:15 PM EST
Originally Posted By NimmerMehr:
So an officer from a NATO member is assigned a position on a NATO command....

I must be missing something as I do not feel any resentment or anger because of this.


"Arrr, Grrr, Fuck Da Phrench, we're gonna shoot us some blue-helmeted invaders...

...oh, nevermind."

Originally Posted By sherrick13:
The French have more balls than we do right now.

I'd probably accept a Frenchie as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at this point.

I would definately trade Sarko for our impostor CinC right now.


Truth really is stranger than fiction, isn't it
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:34:34 PM EST
WTS - genuine WW2 french rifle, has never been fired, dropped once.

T
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:48:09 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/3/2009 6:48:41 PM EST by WildBoar]
All you guys making comments about the French troops being pussies obviously never worked with them or are even aware of waht they are currently doing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4rAzYcRbQs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=HXMALh4ilQs
Link Posted: 8/3/2009 6:57:05 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/3/2009 6:57:59 PM EST by bulldog1967]
I do NOT approve.

J/K, maybe he will make Richmond surrender.
Top Top