Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

The French Were Right All Along

Featured Replies

So the West, outside of France, always restended De Gaulle for pulling France out of NATO’s integrated military command back in 1966 , after harping on for years that the US was not a reliable ally, and that Europe needed to build what would later be described as "strategic autonomy".

This is something that Macron has echoed in his 10 years as President, but his warnings have largely fallen on deaf ears until the s**t show that is Trump 2.0 rolled into town, proving that "le général" was right all along.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2026/02/18/that-irritating-feeling-that-france-was-right

https://archive.ph/HVy9l

" Shortly after Charles de Gaulle became France’s leader in 1958 he warned Konrad Adenauer, then German chancellor, that the Americans were “not reliable, not very solid and understand nothing about history or Europe”. Musing about the shifting balance of world power, le général told an adviser: “Any day the most extraordinary events could happen…America could…become a threat to peace.” By 1966 de Gaulle had built a bomb, pulled out of NATO’s integrated military command and booted American soldiers off French soil."

  • Popular Post
4 hours ago, BLMFem said:

So the West, outside of France, always restended De Gaulle for pulling France out of NATO’s integrated military command back in 1966 , after harping on for years that the US was not a reliable ally, and that Europe needed to build what would later be described as "strategic autonomy".

This is something that Macron has echoed in his 10 years as President, but his warnings have largely fallen on deaf ears until the s**t show that is Trump 2.0 rolled into town, proving that "le général" was right all along.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2026/02/18/that-irritating-feeling-that-france-was-right

https://archive.ph/HVy9l

" Shortly after Charles de Gaulle became France’s leader in 1958 he warned Konrad Adenauer, then German chancellor, that the Americans were “not reliable, not very solid and understand nothing about history or Europe”. Musing about the shifting balance of world power, le général told an adviser: “Any day the most extraordinary events could happen…America could…become a threat to peace.” By 1966 de Gaulle had built a bomb, pulled out of NATO’s integrated military command and booted American soldiers off French soil."

The "general" never liked the idea of NATO. The slightest "scirmish" of an exposed small country (the Baltic States for example), would make the world stumble into WW3.

Therefore, he built up Frances own Nuclear Shield "La Force de frappe". Able to lay to waist an equal amount of territory to an attacker the size of France. At the time, he was hoping that western European States would follow his example. Well, they diden't, rather trusting on the "American Protective shield". Mainly because it was cheaper.

Of course, not even the Oracle of Delphy could have predicted that the US would ever be ruled by a "wrecking ball".

4 minutes ago, swissie said:

Well, they diden't, rather trusting on the "American Protective shield". Mainly because it was cheaper.

Because the French arent much as military allies.

Its Delphi

  • Popular Post
2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Because the French arent much as military allies.

Its Delphi

But the only ones that can "eradicate" Moscow and 200 miles around it. Without American help, well undersood.

28 minutes ago, swissie said:

Able to lay to waist an equal amount of territory to an attacker the size of France.

During the Cold War, France had nuclear missiles that could reach German territory, specifically with the Pluton and Hadès missiles, which were designed for short-range nuclear deterrence.

"Ve had to nuke zee chermans in order to safe zee chermans, mon sewer!"

2 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

During the Cold War, France had nuclear missiles that could reach German territory, specifically with the Pluton and Hadès missiles, which were designed for short-range nuclear deterrence.

"Ve had to nuke zee chermans in order to safe zee chermans, mon sewer!"

Why attack Germany? Why not Switzerland?

11 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

During the Cold War, France had nuclear missiles that could reach German territory, specifically with the Pluton and Hadès missiles, which were designed for short-range nuclear deterrence.

"Ve had to nuke zee chermans in order to safe zee chermans, mon sewer!"

Those were mobile battlefield missiles, which could be used anywhere, and could also be sent from Germany, as there were French troops stationed there.

16 hours ago, BLMFem said:

So the West, outside of France, always restended De Gaulle for pulling France out of NATO’s integrated military command back in 1966 , after harping on for years that the US was not a reliable ally, and that Europe needed to build what would later be described as "strategic autonomy".

This is something that Macron has echoed in his 10 years as President, but his warnings have largely fallen on deaf ears until the s**t show that is Trump 2.0 rolled into town, proving that "le général" was right all along.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2026/02/18/that-irritating-feeling-that-france-was-right

https://archive.ph/HVy9l

" Shortly after Charles de Gaulle became France’s leader in 1958 he warned Konrad Adenauer, then German chancellor, that the Americans were “not reliable, not very solid and understand nothing about history or Europe”. Musing about the shifting balance of world power, le général told an adviser: “Any day the most extraordinary events could happen…America could…become a threat to peace.” By 1966 de Gaulle had built a bomb, pulled out of NATO’s integrated military command and booted American soldiers off French soil."

French are nancy boys. Lasted 6 weeks against Germany.

  • Popular Post
17 hours ago, BLMFem said:

always restended De Gaulle

Restended is a new one for me!

  • Author
17 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. So its an article lauding the genius of the French and the perfidy of the USA. Whats the point?

That's a philosophical question, so not really the right forum for such a discussion. But if you start a thread on "What's the point of anything" in the Pub(?) section I'll be more than willing to participate!thumbsup

  • Author
  • Popular Post
1 hour ago, Harrisfan said:

French are nancy boys. Lasted 6 weeks against Germany.

Your cold, clinical and incredibly intelligent analysis is always appreciated. It's amazing what one can achieve if one barricades oneself in a basement!thumbsup

  • Popular Post
19 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. So its an article lauding the genius of the French and the perfidy of the USA. Whats the point?

That's your idea of a summary? No arguments from the author? No citing of evidence?

Actually, the second paragraph sums it up nicely:

"No other European country has been so consistently sceptical about the dependability of its transatlantic ally nor displayed such a pesky determination to go it alone. Shortly after Charles de Gaulle became France’s leader in 1958 he warned Konrad Adenauer, then German chancellor, that the Americans were “not reliable, not very solid and understand nothing about history or Europe”. Musing about the shifting balance of world power, le général told an adviser: “Any day the most extraordinary events could happen…America could…become a threat to peace.” By 1966 de Gaulle had built a bomb, pulled out of NATO’s integrated military command and booted American soldiers off French soil."

15 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

During the Cold War, France had nuclear missiles that could reach German territory, specifically with the Pluton and Hadès missiles, which were designed for short-range nuclear deterrence.

"Ve had to nuke zee chermans in order to safe zee chermans, mon sewer!"

The US and the UK had "Honest John" and later "Lance" missiles which were also intended to provide a short range nuclear delivery means within Germany.

6 hours ago, candide said:

Those were mobile battlefield missiles, which could be used anywhere, and could also be sent from Germany, as there were French troops stationed there.

The point is, French policy was to wait until the Sovietski tanks began rushing through the Fulda Gap, and then blow their nukular wad all over German territory.

It was a feature, not a bug.

4 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

That's your idea of a summary? No arguments from the author? No citing of evidence?

Actually, the second paragraph sums it up nicely:

"No other European country has been so consistently sceptical about the dependability of its transatlantic ally nor displayed such a pesky determination to go it alone. Shortly after Charles de Gaulle became France’s leader in 1958 he warned Konrad Adenauer, then German chancellor, that the Americans were “not reliable, not very solid and understand nothing about history or Europe”. Musing about the shifting balance of world power, le général told an adviser: “Any day the most extraordinary events could happen…America could…become a threat to peace.” By 1966 de Gaulle had built a bomb, pulled out of NATO’s integrated military command and booted American soldiers off French soil."

So what? Who cares. The French are ingrates that cant fight their way out of the paper bag and we should withdraw from NATO. Duh. So what else is the point? Trump bad authoritarian Socialism good?

  • Popular Post
1 minute ago, Yagoda said:

So what? Who cares. The French are ingrates that cant fight their way out of the paper bag and we should withdraw from NATO. Duh. So what else is the point? Trump bad authoritarian Socialism good?

So now you're trying to deflect from the fact that your summary was inane. And where did you pull your information about French fighting ability out of? You know, it's not incumbent upon you to have opinions about things you clearly know nothing about:

French forces in Afghanistan

French forces in Afghanistan were involved in the War in Afghanistan from late 2001 until fully withdrawing by 2014. They operated within two distinct frameworks:

the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), carried out by NATO on a United Nations mandate and

"Operation Enduring Freedom", under US command, as part of the war on terror.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_forces_in_Afghanistan

France’s Lessons

ABSTRACT: This article explains the role combat in Afghanistan

played on the evolution of the French Army. With decades of

relative peace since the Algerian War, French soldiers began their

service in Afghanistan with little experience and minimal materiel,

but quickly paid the price for developing into a combat-ready force

that quickly responded when terrorist activity increased in Mali

shortly after the Afghanistan involvement.

https://press.armywarcollege.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2774&context=parameters

1 minute ago, Alan Zweibel said:

So now you're trying to deflect from the fact that your summary was inane. And where did you pull your information about French fighting ability out of? You know, it's not incumbent upon you to have opinions about things you clearly know nothing about:

French forces in Afghanistan

French forces in Afghanistan were involved in the War in Afghanistan from late 2001 until fully withdrawing by 2014. They operated within two distinct frameworks:

the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), carried out by NATO on a United Nations mandate and

"Operation Enduring Freedom", under US command, as part of the war on terror.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_forces_in_Afghanistan

France’s Lessons

ABSTRACT: This article explains the role combat in Afghanistan

played on the evolution of the French Army. With decades of

relative peace since the Algerian War, French soldiers began their

service in Afghanistan with little experience and minimal materiel,

but quickly paid the price for developing into a combat-ready force

that quickly responded when terrorist activity increased in Mali

shortly after the Afghanistan involvement.

https://press.armywarcollege.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2774&context=parameters

Wow. Bet ya the Russians are impressed. You defending French military prowess now? LOL.

I guess you agree then that since we are so unreliable, that we should immediately withdraw from Nato or be booted out. The French can defend Europe. Bring our boys home LOL.

Guess thats the point. I agree. US out of Nato!

  • Popular Post
5 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Wow. Bet ya the Russians are impressed. You defending French military prowess now? LOL.

I guess you agree then that since we are so unreliable, that we should immediately withdraw from Nato or be booted out. The French can defend Europe. Bring our boys home LOL.

Guess thats the point. I agree. US out of Nato!

Deflectin much? You made ignorant comments about the French miliatry so you offer dodgy assertions as a deflection.

  • Popular Post
4 hours ago, JAG said:

The US and the UK had "Honest John" and later "Lance" missiles which were also intended to provide a short range nuclear delivery means within Germany.

Its also worth remembering that for pretty much the entirity of the Cold War there was a West Germany and an East Germany, an East Germany packed full of Soviet troops. Pluton and Hadès were intended as battlefield weapons.

NATO had a far more advanced understanding of logistics than the Russians. GW1 was won essentially by fantastic logistics, ensuring vehicles and troops had access to fuel and other supplies. NATO has invested heavily in systems to move equipment extremely quickly, harnessing modern processes used in industry. By contrast, we see, even now, the Russians don't even understand the use of pallets (viz, the destroyed convoys in 2022, with trucks full of hand loaded crates of ammunition and food). NATO strategic use of nuclear weapons wasn't aimed so much at the forward units, but at the supply lines behind them. The Russian assumed that NATO would create an irradiated corridor behind forward units. Those troops would rapidly run out of fuel, and progress halted. BAOR would ensue NATO fuel dumps would be denied to Warsaw Pact forces.

35 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Deflectin much? You made ignorant comments about the French miliatry so you offer dodgy assertions as a deflection.

Why do they have trees planted on the Champs D'elysee?

So the Germans can march in the shade.

Im sure Putin is quaking.

US out of Nato!

  • Popular Post
34 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Why do they have trees planted on the Champs D'elysee?

So the Germans can march in the shade.

Im sure Putin is quaking.

US out of Nato!

It figures that your lame joke depends on events that took place long ago. And that you ignore recent evidence. How well has America fared in wars since 1945?

2 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

It figures that your lame joke depends on events that took place long ago. And that you ignore recent evidence. How well has America fared in wars since 1945?

LOL, got it, LOL

10 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

It figures that your lame joke depends on events that took place long ago. And that you ignore recent evidence. How well has America fared in wars since 1945?

Stunningly well if the tonnage of munitions dropped upon subsistence farming communities is the principal metric.

Invaluable experience of airlifting personnel from embassy roofs and surrounded airbases.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.