France

[Supercharts]

Very basically my question is:
Is FRANCE relevant?
I am of the opinion that FRANCE no longer matters.
Who cares what France THINKS?
Anyone?
Really! They are a member of the US Security Council. Why? WWII is over. France is less important to world peace than Poland.
France? Does any one give a sh*t about France?
Your opinions please.
Thanks.

1) No, don't care about France.

2) Why is anyone on the board of anything? Answer: Historical accident.

3) France might care about France...but I doubt it.

4) I think they invented thongs. That was nice of them. As for the high-heels, I never have figured those out. I think they're supposed to be close-combat weapons or something.

[corplinx]

Didn't they also invent those "european" style men's bathing suits that seem to plague american beaches and pools now?

[iain]

France - still relevant?

- World's 6th largest economy
- Third highest per capita GDP in the world
- Fourth largest contributor to UN budget
- Largest contributor of troops to UN peacekeeping missions of any UN security council member (as of 1998)
- Very important role in middle-east because of France's long standing relationships with many middle-east countries.
- Has nuclear weapons (and not afraid to test them )

So, yes, France is still relevant (unless the criterion for being relevant is being called the USA). Certainly France can claim to be as relevant, or more so, than the UK, Germany, Russia or China.

[Kimpatsu]

Ah, but is the USA relevant?
Can't spell (colour, centre, etc.)
Banana republic. (See Florida.)
World's biggest bully.
Rush Limbaugh.

I say, abolish the USA now! Vive la France!

[ZeeGerman]

Quote:

Originally posted by Supercharts
Very basically my question is:
Is FRANCE relevant?
I am of the opinion that FRANCE no longer matters.
Who cares what France THINKS?
Anyone?
Really! They are a member of the US Security Council. Why? WWII is over. France is less important to world peace than Poland.
France? Does any one give a sh*t about France?
Your opinions please.
Thanks.

The US security council (sic.)
That says it all. You guys are so self absorbed that it hurts.

And yes, France matters a lot:
Great Wine
Great cooking
Great culture

Three things the US really lacks

[Fade]

Quote:

Rush Limbaugh.

CHEAP SHOT. I CALL SHENANNIGANS!

[DanishDynamite]

Quote:

Originally posted by ZeeGerman

The US security council (sic.)
That says it all. You guys are so self absorbed that it hurts.

And yes, France matters a lot:
Great Wine
Great cooking
Great culture

Three things the US really lacks

Great wine
Great cooking
Great culture

Three things the US really lacks

Obviously you've never tasted my homemade wine, eaten my smoked sausage and chicken jumbalaya or seen my art collection (all painted by me.)

[Kimpatsu]

Quote:

Originally posted by Smalso
Obviously you've never tasted my homemade wine, eaten my smoked sausage and chicken jumbalaya or seen my art collection (all painted by me.)

Is that an invitation or a threat?

[Graham]

Personally I think it's foolish to discount France or Germany at this stage. World affairs go round and round like a fairground ride but it's always the same horses you see.

Historically, all of the major European countries have gone through high periods and low periods.

France suffered major losses in the world wars and has been in sort of a low period for a while but it won't last forever.

Together, France and Germany make a formiddable opponent, not least because they could russle up a lot of allies in the world if it came to the crunch.

Iain quoted some very pertinent statistics. Militarily, France might not have anything like US strength, but with an economy and population like that, backed by German industry, a couple of years would sort that. Politically they have a lot of old allies and centuries of experience. You wouldn't for instance, see any French official spouting the kind of tactless crap Donald Rumsfeld comes out with (and he's supposed to be the smart one). They know how to play the smart game.

The US may seem to have been supreme for a while now but really, realative to world history, how long has it been? An eyeblink, nothing more. Maybe "y'all" will go on indefinitely in a sort of "Thousand Year McReich" and maybe not, time will tell. I wouldn't put any money at all on France not being there to see it through though, one way or the other.

Graham

[Drooper]

Germany and France are on the wane as geopolitical powers.

Economically they are waning and the Euro, as well as the direction of EU legislation, will see that trend continue.

However, the single most important reason why their decline will continue is down to demographics. Unless there is a sudden embrace of large scale immigration France and Germany (in particular) will have an rapidly aging and then falling population.

[Drooper]

Quote:

Originally posted by Graham
Iain quoted some very pertinent statistics.

Some of them pretty ropey.

France doesn't even have the third highest GDP per capita in the EU, let alone the world.

[iain]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper


Some of them pretty ropey.

France doesn't even have the third highest GDP per capita in the EU, let alone the world.

If the sources I found in my brief web search were incorrect, I am happy to be corrected. The GDP was the least significant of the stats I think, so I am happy to let that one go.

The original question was "Is France relevant?" France is a major world power economically, politically, culturally and to some extent even militarily. If you exclude the US (as the world's only superpower it is out on its own) France pretty much has to feature in any list of the next rank of world powers, along with countries like the UK, Germany, Japan, China & Russia (depending on how you measure things). I can't see on what basis it could reasonably be excluded.

So the answer is that however you look at is, yes France is relevant.

[Drooper]

It depends what you mean by "relevant"

You could argue that French foreign policy is so balatantly and singularly self serving that it tends to get the country sidelined in many instances.

In the world of global geopolitics, there would be a number of countries you would get onside before France, on most issues.

In fact, come to think about it, France is rarely if ever courted on an international level over anything. They tend to get completely bypassed, with the recognition that they will be expecting some pay off at the end, if they possess some sort of veto power on the issue concerned (e.g. a security council vote).

[iain]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper
It depends what you mean by "relevant"

You could argue that French foreign policy is so balatantly and singularly self serving that it tends to get the country sidelined in many instances.

You could argue that but I think you would be wrong to do so

France has played an active and influential role in international politics for several hundred years and continues to do so.

Edited to add The French would certainly disagree with your assessment of their foreign policy. For example, see French foreign policy. Personally, I don't think that any of the major powers are much better than the others.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by Graham:

Quote:

Together, France and Germany make a formiddable opponent, not least because they could russle up a lot of allies in the world if it came to the crunch.

Where from? I'd imagine a lot of third world countries would be wary of France with it's imperial past. Eastern European countries would have a similar attitude to Germany for similar reasons.

Quote:

Militarily, France might not have anything like US strength, but with an economy and population like that, backed by German industry, a couple of years would sort that.

As Drooper pointed out both France and Germany are on the wane economically. Germany is facing it's worse economic crisis in decades, while French unemployment is over 10%. Given the economic and political direction both countries have chosen, the next few yeears is likely to see an even greater deterioration in this respect, not an improvement.

Quote:

You wouldn't for instance, see any French official spouting the kind of tactless crap Donald Rumsfeld comes out with (and he's supposed to be the smart one). They know how to play the smart game.

So it's a "smart" move to let Robert Mugabe into the country, as France is doing? If France and Germany are blessed with such a talented ruling class, why are they in the dire state they're in? And how did a nation run by idiots, the US, manage to gain the economic and technological hegemony it enjoys today?

Quote:

Politically they have a lot of old allies and centuries of experience.

Colonialism, the Reign of Terror, the Napoleonic experience, 1940, Vichy, the Algerian crisis, the OAS. Years of experience alright.

Originally postede by iain:

Quote:

So the answer is that however you look at is, yes France is relevant.

Actually France must be considered irrelevant if you take into account the determination of the French ruling classes to abolish the French nation state and replace it with a European superstate.

[Graham]

According to the CIA France has about the 12th largest GDP per Capita in the world ($25,400)

The top three, fyi, are Luxembourg ($43,400) US (€36,300 and Bermuda ($34,800). Even Ireland comes in higher than France at $27,500!

It's not a good marker for world relevance though, as Iain says. How important is Bermuda geopolitically, other than as a place to keep your money? Russia, on the other hand, has a GDP per capita of only €8,300.

In terms of blunt GDP, France is only 6th ($1.51 Trillion) behind US ($10.82) China ($5.56) Hapan ($3.45) India ($2.5) and Germany ($2.17)

In terms of military manpower, France apparently has just over 12 million men fit for service, compared to roughly the same for the UK and 30 milion for Russia. There's no stat for the US under that heading for some reason.

France has a military budget of $46.5 billion (2.57% GDP), compared to UK $31.7 billion (2.32%) and US $276.7 billion (3.2%)

By these measures, France would appear to be a significant force in the world and I think the point of my previous post stands.

Graham

[rikzilla]

Quote:

Originally posted by ZeeGerman


The US security council (sic.)
That says it all. You guys are so self absorbed that it hurts.

And yes, France matters a lot:
Great Wine
Great cooking
Great culture

Three things the US really lacks

Only one word is needed to describe you.
"Hosenscheisser"


-z

BTW, decisive leadership is what is needed against Iraq. The UN is almost by definition incapable of such leadership. If the US leads the way and properly sells the necessity of such action, the world will follow.

France is an appeaser. They are still pissed off about the major $$ that Elf lost on Iraqi oil contracts due to the sanctions. Talk about war for oil! The French are content to let the Iraqi people live under the yoke of a more repressive totalitarian government than East Germany in order to get back into bed with Saddam and make lots of oil money! I've heard the war for oil blather from the left....but apparently what the French want is "peace in our time" FOR OIL! Break out the black umbrellas folks!

Oh and Zee German, leck mich am Amerikaner arsch!

[Drooper]

Quote:

Originally posted by iain
You could argue that but I think you would be wrong to do so

France has played an active and influential role in international politics for several hundred years and continues to do so.

Edited to add The French would certainly disagree with your assessment of their foreign policy. For example, see French foreign policy. Personally, I don't think that any of the major powers are much better than the others.

Some examples to support my case:

Nuclear testing in the Pacific
bombing the Rainbow Warrior
Subsequently releasing (and awarding medals to) the bombers.
Inviting Robert Mugabe to Paris, not bothering to tell EU partners (who had signed up to a ban on his travel).
French position on agriculture vis a vis the WTO and CAP reform.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by Graham:

Quote:

By these measures, France would appear to be a significant force in the world and I think the point of my previous post stands.

Not until you address the specific issues some of us raised in response to your previous posts.

Quote:

The top three, fyi, are Luxembourg ($43,400) US (€36,300 and Bermuda ($34,800). Even Ireland comes in higher than France at $27,500!

Why is this such a suprise? Have you been living under a rock for the past few years?

[Supercharts]

This is how the US will finance the war:

[Graham]

Shane,

I didn't see this post until I'd already posted my last, so I'll answer it now.


Where from? I'd imagine a lot of third world countries would be wary of France with it's imperial past. Eastern European countries would have a similar attitude to Germany for similar reasons.

I think this is somewhat naive. When discussing international relations, I think you have to think in terms of years and attitudes change over years, depending on the intervening events. For example, during the Napoleonic period, countries went from being deadly enemies to best of friends and back again, sometime si a matter of months. The worst insults of the past can be forgotten if there's a common foe to turn your hatred on.

As Drooper pointed out both France and Germany are on the wane economically. Germany is facing it's worse economic crisis in decades, while French unemployment is over 10%. Given the economic and political direction both countries have chosen, the next few yeears is likely to see an even greater deterioration in this respect, not an improvement.

Economies go in cycles too, they'll be down for a while but eventually they'll pick up. Neither France nor germany is likely to collapse into total economic ruin anytime inthe near future and even if they did it wouldn't be the first time and yet they're still here.


So it's a "smart" move to let Robert Mugabe into the country, as France is doing? If France and Germany are blessed with such a talented ruling class, why are they in the dire state they're in? And how did a nation run by idiots, the US, manage to gain the economic and technological hegemony it enjoys today?

Politicians do stupid things. That's practically what they're there for. Personally I find any sort of treaty or negotiation with terrorists extremely objectionable. However, things might be a lot less pleasant for both you and I in our little country right now if there weren't politicians willing to deal with such scum.

Colonialism, the Reign of Terror, the Napoleonic experience, 1940, Vichy, the Algerian crisis, the OAS. Years of experience alright.

You could put together a similar list for just about any major country, the States not excluded. Experience is experience - theoretically we learn from it. The fact that France is not charging into war will-nilly might suggest that they have.

Actually France must be considered irrelevant if you take into account the determination of the French ruling classes to abolish the French nation state and replace it with a European superstate

No more so than one minister in a cabinet is irrelevant or one player in a football team, especially if that player is the captain (or thinks he is!).

[Drooper]

Quote:

Originally posted by Supercharts
This is how the US will finance the war:

We will return to this war after a brief message from our sponsors...

[mindless]

Quote:

Originally posted by Graham
Maybe "y'all" will go on indefinitely in a sort of "Thousand Year McReich"

I ruptured a lung laughing at that

[Graham]

Quote:

Originally posted by Shane Costello
Originally posted by Graham:

Not until you address the specific issues some of us raised in response to your previous posts.

Why is this such a suprise? Have you been living under a rock for the past few years?

Sorry, as I say , it took me a while to put together that last post.

As to living under a rock, you're a bit touchy aren't you? That little titbit was for the non-Irish readers of the board. Since my little yellow lifraft is currently beached somewhere near you I am well aware of what a nation of high rollers we are!

Take it easy, boss.

Graham

[iain]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper


Some examples to support my case:

Nuclear testing in the Pacific
bombing the Rainbow Warrior
Subsequently releasing (and awarding medals to) the bombers.
Inviting Robert Mugabe to Paris, not bothering to tell EU partners (who had signed up to a ban on his travel).
French position on agriculture vis a vis the WTO and CAP reform.

All major countries have done no shortage of dodgy things when it comes to foreign policy (or pretty much any other area of government). I'm not defending French foreign policy, any more than US or UK foreign policy.

However, the fact that most people reading your post will be familiar with the items you mention supports the case that France is relevant on the world stage. How much do most people know about the foreign policy actions of Luxembourg, Ireland or Bermuda? Not a lot. Maybe they do some pretty dodgy things too, but because those countries have less weight world-wide people just don't notice.

Conversely the USA is the big hitter on the world stage and for every one "dodgy" action France has taken, we could probably think of 10 the US has done, largely because everyone notices US foreign policy. That in itself doesn't make the US worse that France though.

[Giz]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper


bombing the Rainbow Warrior

While other nations have Trafalgar, Midway or Tsushima Straits, this remains the creme de la creme of French naval action.

Whose to blame them giving out a few medals for it. Those eco-warriors might have been armed with any number of lentils...

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by Graham:

Quote:

I think this is somewhat naive. When discussing international relations, I think you have to think in terms of years and attitudes change over years, depending on the intervening events.

You're the naive one, not me. You've claimed France and Germany would automatically rustle up allies, and that economic revival in these countries is inevitable, without mentioning how this is supposed to occur. Who exactly are the "old allies" France could count on?

Quote:

Economies go in cycles too, they'll be down for a while but eventually they'll pick up.

But how, given the reluctance of German and French politicians to undertake the reforms necessary to stimulate economic recovery, and the demographic problems both countrieS face, not to mention the economic straight-jacket of EMU?

History has witnessed the terminal decline and disappearance of many economic and political powers i.e. the Roman, Spanish and Ottoman empires, as well as the technological decline of the Chinese and Arabic cultures vis a vis the western world.

Quote:

Politicians do stupid things. That's practically what they're there for.

You claimed that French politicains had a high degree of professionalism, in contrast with their dimmer equivalents across the Atlantic. Again, if this degree of talent and ability is present, then why does France have so many serious problems?

Quote:

You could put together a similar list for just about any major country, the States not excluded. Experience is experience - theoretically we learn from it. The fact that France is not charging into war will-nilly might suggest that they have.

Actually the American Revolution wasn't followed by state-sponsored slaughter of it's citizens, followed by autocracy. If France reallly has learned from years of experience then why are they allowing Robert Mugabe into the country NOW. And what is your evidence that the US and it's allies are charging willy-nilly into war?

Quote:

No more so than one minister in a cabinet is irrelevant or one player in a football team, especially if that player is the captain (or thinks he is!).

You're missing the point. The French state and French government cannot be relevant if they are about to subsumed into an European superstate. The degree to which the French would influence such an entity is entirely open to speculation.

[Drooper]

Quote:

Originally posted by iain
All major countries have done no shortage of dodgy things when it comes to foreign policy (or pretty much any other area of government). I'm not defending French foreign policy, any more than US or UK foreign policy.

However, the fact that most people reading your post will be familiar with the items you mention supports the case that France is relevant on the world stage. How much do most people know about the foreign policy actions of Luxembourg, Ireland or Bermuda? Not a lot. Maybe they do some pretty dodgy things too, but because those countries have less weight world-wide people just don't notice.

Conversely the USA is the big hitter on the world stage and for every one "dodgy" action France has taken, we could probably think of 10 the US has done, largely because everyone notices US foreign policy. That in itself doesn't make the US worse that France though.

I think you miss the point.

It is not that these are dodgy things, but they are:

1) things that are done brazenly with a thumb the nose at the world. AND
2) lead to diminution of their influence and relevance.


By comparison, US policy on Iraq at the moment mght slip into 1). However, note that they still secured a UN resolution and they are still trying to tie up international support and they are also trying (or trying to be seen) to provide Saddam with a way out.

Whatever the outcome, the US will never fall into 2) in this instance because they do in fact have the clout to accomplish this particular set of political and military objectives on their own.

[iain]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper

I think you miss the point.

I take the point, I just don't agree with it

[Drooper]

Quote:

Originally posted by iain
I take the point, I just don't agree with it

[John Wayne voice]Well that's alright then pilgrim [/John Wayne voice]

[ZeeGerman]

Quote:

Originally posted by rikzilla


Only one word is needed to describe you.
"Hosenscheisser"


-z

BTW, decisive leadership is what is needed against Iraq. The UN is almost by definition incapable of such leadership. If the US leads the way and properly sells the necessity of such action, the world will follow.

France is an appeaser. They are still pissed off about the major $$ that Elf lost on Iraqi oil contracts due to the sanctions. Talk about war for oil! The French are content to let the Iraqi people live under the yoke of a more repressive totalitarian government than East Germany in order to get back into bed with Saddam and make lots of oil money! I've heard the war for oil blather from the left....but apparently what the French want is "peace in our time" FOR OIL! Break out the black umbrellas folks!

Oh and Zee German, leck mich am Amerikaner arsch!

Ohoo,

direct personal insult by an American who knows some German words. I'm deeply impressed. You must be a real cosmopolitan. However, since not all members of this forum share your profound knowledge of foreign languages, you should care to post a translation. Or do you lack the courage?

Zee

[Graham]

You're the naive one, not me. You've claimed France and Germany would automatically rustle up allies, and that economic revival in these countries is inevitable, without mentioning how this is supposed to occur. Who exactly are the "old allies" France could count on?

This is getting silly. I think that you're taking a short-sighted view of a situation that evolves in a much longer term, that's all. IMO, Irealnd and the UK aside maybe the other EU nations would line up behing France and Germany before they would the US in an extreme situation. Don't tell me that a, b and c countries are supporting the American war effort because that's not relevant to what I'm saying - we're not in an extreme situation, relations between France/Germany and the US are strained at worst and a long, long way from damaged beyond repair. This little spat will most likely fizzle out like so many others before and we can all go back to laughing at one anothers' amusing little cultural differences.


But how, given the reluctance of German and French politicians to undertake the reforms necessary to stimulate economic recovery, and the demographic problems both countrieS face, not to mention the economic straight-jacket of EMU?

Again I was referring (perhaps not as clearly as I should have) to the very long term. Governments and politicians come and go. Again, the likelihood is that this economic phase will eventually pass. If you're going to take the situation at this exact moment and project it into the future then yes, they would appear to be screwed.

History has witnessed the terminal decline and disappearance of many economic and political powers i.e. the Roman, Spanish and Ottoman empires, as well as the technological decline of the Chinese and Arabic cultures vis a vis the western world.

Empires, as you say, rise and fall. Countries? Not so much. Italy and Rome remain intact, Spain remains intact, Turkey I think would constitute what remains of the Ottoman Empire. Long before the Spainish Empire was dreamt of, Spain was conquered by the Romans and turned into just another province. Five 1500 (?) years later it was conquered by Napolean and made a French province (or protectorate or something, I don't remember now).


You claimed that French politicains had a high degree of professionalism, in contrast with their dimmer equivalents across the Atlantic. Again, if this degree of talent and ability is present, then why does France have so many serious problems?

No, I made a facetious and nasty comment about Donald Rumsfeld, whch I think was well-deserved. The question wasn't whether France was better than the US or anyone else. The question was: Is France relevant? Part of my response was that they have a political and diplomatic system at least the equal of any other civilised country and better than some.

Actually the American Revolution wasn't followed by state-sponsored slaughter of it's citizens, followed by autocracy. If France reallly has learned from years of experience then why are they allowing Robert Mugabe into the country NOW. And what is your evidence that the US and it's allies are charging willy-nilly into war?

As to state sponsored slaughter, one the civil war had ended a large proportion of the blueshirt armies headed off to do just that in putting down the Sioux and other troublesome tribes. I though tI addressed the Mugabe situation already - I don't like terrorists (and I would put Mugabe in that category too) but somebody has to deal with them and sometimes it seems like the only way to do that is to get your hands dirty and muck in. On the other hand, I suppose, France could invade Zimbabwe . . . Finally, I didn't say the US and its allies were charging willy nilly into war, I said France wasn't.

You're missing the point. The French state and French government cannot be relevant if they are about to subsumed into an European superstate. The degree to which the French would influence such an entity is entirely open to speculation.

The founding premise of the EU is an equal voice for everyone. Even if that dream falls by the wayside it hardly seems likely that France will be one of the ones to lose out. Even so, the degree to which the French would influence such an entity is irrelevant. The superstate will be, at least to some degree, democratic and the French will represent a significant block of the voting public. The EU's opinions will be their opinions (in at least as mush as the French gvernment's opinions represent those of the people today) and their voice will have grown, not diminished.

Graham

Edited for a stray code

[Kimpatsu]

I think the whole world should be united under my dictatorship. I've already got Mandela and Clinton backing me.

[Graham]

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimpatsu
I think the whole world should be united under my dictatorship. I've already got Mandela and Clinton backing me.

Good call with Mandela, everybody likes him. You might want to ditch the other fellah though!

[Martin]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper
bombing the Rainbow Warrior

I'm sorry - this is a bad thing?

[Drooper]

Quote:

Originally posted by Martinm


I'm sorry - this is a bad thing?

Show me where I said this was a bad thing.

When some people think of France images and words waft through their thoughts.
Paris, romance, Eiffel tower...

I have other words.
Corrupt, dishonest, self-absorbed, decrepit, pretentious, has-been. Those are a few of the words I can come up with off the top of my head.
In a few day time, the festivities will start and information can finally be safely released, we will see just how self-serving and dirty-dealing the French are.

[Kimpatsu]

Quote:

Originally posted by Douglas
we will see just how self-serving and dirty-dealing the French are.

No, we will see just how self-serving and dirty-dealing the French government is.
There is a difference. Or would you like all Americans to be judged by the standards of Dubya?