- This topic has 3 voices and 9 replies.
-
Posts
-
Not exactly sure why this happened, but it is historic nonetheless.German troops stationed in France for first time since Second World War
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/german-troops-france-euro-support The force stationed outside Strasbourg was agreed by Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel as a show of unity between the countries. The French defence minister, Alain Jupp?, hailed the "highly symbolic" move as an end to "centuries of conflict"** I'd say since AD 843.
Unless they are marching down the Champs Elysee I don't think it is really news.
They did. In 1994, under the supervision of Helmut Kohl and Fran?ois Mitterrand. (Guess you were asleep that day ;D )http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xfeewj_resume-du-defile-du-14-juillet-1994-en-presence-de-l-eurocorps_news
No, I knew about that, but then they were not there to stay as they apparently are now. At least, until the French pull another one of their pride fits like they did in '66 when they pulled completely out of military cooperation with NATO on a point of pride.
No, I knew about that, but then they were not there to stay as they apparently are now. At least, until the French pull another one of their pride fits like they did in '66 when they pulled completely out of military cooperation with NATO on a point of pride.
Would you run into a gentlemen's agreement where you won't be authorized to decide about what you can do in your own backyard ?
The US did not twist their arm to sign on in the first place. Apparently France thought the threat was real enough in 1949. If you remember NATO was a direct reaction to the creation of the Warsaw pact.
Probably because of the Vietnam war, and “the recent French experience with the Algerian War of Independence was that it was impossible, in the long run, for a democracy to impose by force a government over a foreign population.”Not to mention the feeling De Gaulle had to move France from being a follower of the United States ... (and his repeated denials of UK admission to the EEC)
I think the significance here is obviously confined to the symbolic, in light of the history between the nations.
I think the significance here is obviously confined to the symbolic, in light of the history between the nations.
Right
You are right in that it is some hellacious symbolism.I am certain the French had for themselves, perfectly adequate reasons for pulling out of the military aspects of NATO; tha does not mean I think they were right in doing so. When they did it exposed NATO as a fragile organization and could have emboldened the Soviets. That it did not says more about Soviet restraint than French prudence. The French have always thought they were superior to the rest of Europe, both culturally and intellectually, most particularly since 1789. That is not to say that Americans don't have our own brand of particularism, we do.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
