France'S Hollande Defends Early Troop Pullout From Afghanistan

[Scott]

Unsourced quotes have been removed. This is a violation of fair use policy. It's also off-topic.

[tlansford]

This move though predictable demonstrates that the opinion of the French Muslim population, who voted for Hollande in large numbers is more important to him than any commitments France may have made vis foreign policy. I just hope France don't find they need bailing out by America in the near future or they may well be disappointed.

Opinion poll carried out by Ifop in late 2011 showed 76% in favour of a French pullout from Afghanistan, with 44% wanting it immediate and a further 35% in 2012 or 2013 (ie before the original exit date of 2014 in tandem with the US).

Therefore it was hardly a tough call for Hollande to make and merely follows the actions of the Dutch (withdrew 2010) and Canada (2011).

Sadly the Afghan campaign has suffered from muddled political objectives, Iraqi distractions, and a failure to sell the war to domestic audiences. Now compounded by economic considerations, the swing of public opinion against the war puts immense pressure on democratic politicians.

The French saw a minimal amount of action in Afghanistan As such, they have a moral responsibility to support the 3 allies that bore the brunt of action in AFghanistan during the draw down. Sentiment is very strong in the USA, UK and Canada to withdraw all troops, yet these governments are honouring their commitments to ensure an effective transition. The French retreat is sheer cowardice and an attempt to curry favour with certain vocal interest groups in France. For the record, the death toll for the 3 countries that carried the bulk of fighting were as follows; United States 1,886, UK 395 and Canada 158.

Yes, it is tragic that 86 French soldiers died in Afghanistan, but it is telling that many other countries paid a much higher price per contingent. Poland, Australia, Denmark, the Nederlands all took it harder (as a % of personnel) than the French and yet none of these countries abandoned their allies. The French, Italians and Germans sought out the least dangerous areas to place their personnel and left the nasty zones of Kandahar to the UK, Canada and USA. Kandahar was the killing zone and the French wouldn't go there. The Australians were not afraid of Kandahar and provided their special ops teams to provide cover to the Canadian and US forces stationed there, while the French and some other Europeans stayed safe. And now the French leave. They won't even provide protection for NGOs. This speaks volumes.

I am sorry, but I have absolutely no use for the current French government and its position on this matter. As usual, the responsibility for keeping the EU safe in future will once again fall upon the weary shoulders of the UK, Nederlands and Denmark. It is so typical. Some things never change. I suppose when the national psyche is influenced by standing up to totalitarian bullies in the past, it influences the political policies of future generations.

Everyone is pulling out of Afghanistan - no one is being abandoned by the French doing what every country involved in the country is doing - making their own decisions about their own troops. Notice that 40% of their troops are staying ??

"As usual, the responsibility for keeping the EU safe in future will once again fall upon the weary shoulders of the UK, Nederlands and Denmark."

Completely off the mark, that one. Not the least of the reasons being that a continued presence in Afghanistan has nothing to do with EU security.

[OzMick]

Everyone is pulling out of Afghanistan - no one is being abandoned by the French doing what every country involved in the country is doing - making their own decisions about their own troops. Notice that 40% of their troops are staying ??

"As usual, the responsibility for keeping the EU safe in future will once again fall upon the weary shoulders of the UK, Nederlands and Denmark."

Completely off the mark, that one. Not the least of the reasons being that a continued presence in Afghanistan has nothing to do with EU security.

And there was me thinking one of the reasons they were there was to shut down terrorist training camps.

[folium]

Everyone is pulling out of Afghanistan - no one is being abandoned by the French doing what every country involved in the country is doing - making their own decisions about their own troops. Notice that 40% of their troops are staying ??

"As usual, the responsibility for keeping the EU safe in future will once again fall upon the weary shoulders of the UK, Nederlands and Denmark."

Completely off the mark, that one. Not the least of the reasons being that a continued presence in Afghanistan has nothing to do with EU security.

And there was me thinking one of the reasons they were there was to shut down terrorist training camps.

Unfortunately they have now been relocated to Pakistan (though less so since the drone war kicked off), Yemen, parts of the Sahel and possibly southern Somalia.

[folium]

In respect to French combat operations, please be realistic. Flying high above the ground and dropping ordinance is hardly as risky as having actual boots on the ground. The French stayed as close to Kabul, the safest spot in Afghanistan. I recognize the contribution the French made, but the reality is that when there was an all out combat operation it typically fell to the US, UK and Canada to carry out the operations. This is why those 3 countries' combat fatalities were so high. The French presence in Afghanistan hot zones, typically lay with logistics and air support.

The deaths of another 4 French soldiers and 5 injured yesterday again highlight your inaccurate portrayal of French military activities in Kapisa and the notion that they duck combat zones in Afghanistan.

[Colin Yai]

In respect to French combat operations, please be realistic. Flying high above the ground and dropping ordinance is hardly as risky as having actual boots on the ground. The French stayed as close to Kabul, the safest spot in Afghanistan. I recognize the contribution the French made, but the reality is that when there was an all out combat operation it typically fell to the US, UK and Canada to carry out the operations. This is why those 3 countries' combat fatalities were so high. The French presence in Afghanistan hot zones, typically lay with logistics and air support.

The deaths of another 4 French soldiers and 5 injured yesterday again highlight your inaccurate portrayal of French military activities in Kapisa and the notion that they duck combat zones in Afghanistan.

Of course you do not have be engaged in anything military to be "taken out" by an Islamic suicide bomber ,various atrocities world wide proves this beyond any reasonable doubt .

[Credo]

In respect to French combat operations, please be realistic. Flying high above the ground and dropping ordinance is hardly as risky as having actual boots on the ground. The French stayed as close to Kabul, the safest spot in Afghanistan. I recognize the contribution the French made, but the reality is that when there was an all out combat operation it typically fell to the US, UK and Canada to carry out the operations. This is why those 3 countries' combat fatalities were so high. The French presence in Afghanistan hot zones, typically lay with logistics and air support.

The deaths of another 4 French soldiers and 5 injured yesterday again highlight your inaccurate portrayal of French military activities in Kapisa and the notion that they duck combat zones in Afghanistan.

The French have always been a fickle ally. Or are you saying that they are militarily superior and that's why the lower death rate? So these deaths are a momentary lapse as they rush to the exit?

[folium]

The deaths of another 4 French soldiers and 5 injured yesterday again highlight your inaccurate portrayal of French military activities in Kapisa and the notion that they duck combat zones in Afghanistan.

The French have always been a fickle ally. Or are you saying that they are militarily superior and that's why the lower death rate? So these deaths are a momentary lapse as they rush to the exit?

The politicians of all ISAF supplying countries are rushing to the exit, some (Canada, Holland) have already discarded a combat role much as the French intend to do by end of this year. The US plans to extract 23,000 troops home in time for election day is far more significant.

As to fickle allies the UK picked up the nickname of perfidious albion in the 18th century, an epithet repeated by Dick Cheney a few years back in reference to UK government negotiations with Syria's Assad. A little rich given Cheney's long history of adherence to realpoiltik, iedoing what's best for national interests even if it is frowned upon by allies.

Suez 1956 is a classic example of fickle allies, US style. As was initial US support for the Viet Minh and other insurgent groups in Indochine in 1945-46 by organizations such as OSS as part of the drive to ensure no easy return for colonialism to the region.

Back to the French, their military as configured today is highly professional and have accounted very well for themselves once their politicians got out of the way!

[flying]

The United States Empire is following a long line of empires and conquerors that have met their end in Afghanistan. The Median and Persian Empires, Alexander the Great, the Seleucids, the Indo-Greeks, Turks, Mongols, British and Soviets all met the end of their ambitions in Afghanistan.

Older article from 2009

Afghanistan: Where Empires Go to Die

Genghis Khan could not hold onto Afghanistan. Neither will the United States

Edited June 10, 2012 by flying