• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'French base' for German troops

Nothing new here. Another year, another French surrender. :mrgreen:
 
This is probably just a bureaucratic way to bolster the statistics on foreign deployment. Considering that the rules of engagement in France are little different than in Afghanistan, this makes it look like Germany is sending more troops out of the country:
German special forces had an important Taliban commander in their sights in Afghanistan. But he escaped -- because the Germans were not authorized to use lethal force.

Just sarcasm.
 
BBC NEWS | Europe | 'French base' for German troops

Any reactions to this? Its rather extraordinary considering where Europe was just 60 years ago. It is another proof, in a long line, that in the past 60 years no place has changed more than Europe.

Really? Wow, just 60 years ago the US was at war with Germany and now we have bases there. I guess no place has changed more than pretty much anywhere else.
 
Both the French and German Governments see their two country's as being the leaders of the EU.
One of the idea's that each administration has proposed is the formation of an EU Army.
I remember when German troops went to train with British troops in Wales, the furor was something to behold, the fuss lasted until something which warranted bigger headlines appeared, after which such training exercises became the norm.
Should the EU eventually become something like the United States of Europe, I would suppose that much as happens in the US, individual States would have their equivalent of the US National Guard, while the USEU would have regular standing armed forces.
Quite where this would lead NATO is unclear.
 
Really? Wow, just 60 years ago the US was at war with Germany and now we have bases there. I guess no place has changed more than pretty much anywhere else.

Wow, you really look at things in a fair way..
OFcourse you have bases because you forced them there..

Geez; if you are blind to see this difference, and the difference between the US having bases in Germany and Germany having bases in France, then I really give you up, because its no point in doing anything but ignoring you to avoid dumbification.
 
I hope this thread is not an example of where the US is intellectually.
 
Last edited:
Nothing new here. Another year, another French surrender. :mrgreen:

This is so old, perhaps you ought to brush up on your knowledge about France to understand how it is a much greater country than the US in many ways.

You typically do not know anything else about France than you need to throw that line out every time France is mentioned on this forum? This doesn't go for you alone, but obviously several people in this thread and many people on this forum. I believe you would find some studies on French society quite interesting and enlightening.
 
I hope this thread is not an example of where the US is intellectually.
Yes -- because to not see things as you do, one must be QUITE stupid.

:roll:
 
This is so old, perhaps you ought to brush up on your knowledge about France to understand how it is a much greater country than the US in many ways.

You typically do not know anything else about France than you need to throw that line out every time France is mentioned on this forum? This doesn't go for you alone, but obviously several people in this thread and many people on this forum. I believe you would find some studies on French society quite interesting and enlightening.


You're right.
Now_ please tell me in what ways France is better than the United States. We can go ahead and eliminate the idea the France is better in anything to do with military (which almost includes all technologies). Enlighten me.
 
You're right.
Now_ please tell me in what ways France is better than the United States. We can go ahead and eliminate the idea the France is better in anything to do with military (which almost includes all technologies). Enlighten me.

According to many "stats" and living standard studies France is the best country to live in. Socialism gives the French people quite a lot of freedoms and a more relaxed lifestyle, the state pays for a lot of things that are unheard of in the US and even other European countries. The French work less than most other countries, yet are most effective per hour worked. The French lifestyle I think is something that many people would appreciate if they tested it. France is quite technologically advanced btw, but nowhere near for example Germany or the US. But not everything is about technology is it? The French have average faster broadband connections than people in the US btw, and higher speeds than Germany, just to mention that.

What I am referencing is a lot of different tests, even tests thrown in my face that is suppose to prove something about the US vs Germany for example, and also things that I have picked up on various forums, in news and when reading statistics. So in general I would say the French are very well of, rich people with an enormously comfortable lifestyle and a good state that takes care of them.
 
Socialism gives the French people quite a lot of freedoms and a more relaxed lifestyle, the state pays for a lot of things that are unheard of in the US and even other European countries.

Actually, the State doesn't pay for anything, it just redistributes money that it extorts from productive people to less productive people. The nature of socialism leads to inefficiency. Compare the economic performance of France to the US and, say, Sweden, from the start of the Reaganomics experiment up to 2003.

real GDP/Capita in US in 1980 = $21,335.54
real GDP/Capita in France in 1980 = $16,217.39
real GDP/Capita in Sweden in 1980 = $17,164.86

French incomes are 76% of American incomes in 1980.

real GDP/Capita in US in 2003 = $34,223.17
real GDP/Capita in France in 2003 = $22,867.27
real GDP/Capita in Sweden in 2003 = $24,498.12

French incomes are 67% of American incomes in 2003.

Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in US = 60.4%
Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in France = 41.0%
Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in Sweden = 42.7%

Socialism is making the French poorer, in comparison to the US, over time.
 
Actually, the State doesn't pay for anything, it just redistributes money that it extorts from productive people to less productive people. The nature of socialism leads to inefficiency. Compare the economic performance of France to the US and, say, Sweden, from the start of the Reaganomics experiment up to 2003.

real GDP/Capita in US in 1980 = $21,335.54
real GDP/Capita in France in 1980 = $16,217.39
real GDP/Capita in Sweden in 1980 = $17,164.86

French incomes are 76% of American incomes in 1980.

real GDP/Capita in US in 2003 = $34,223.17
real GDP/Capita in France in 2003 = $22,867.27
real GDP/Capita in Sweden in 2003 = $24,498.12

French incomes are 67% of American incomes in 2003.

Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in US = 60.4%
Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in France = 41.0%
Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in Sweden = 42.7%

Socialism is making the French poorer, in comparison to the US, over time.

Yea but considering that the US growth was fuelled by getting into massive amounts of debt (personal and state), then I would not really brag about it :)
 
Actually, the State doesn't pay for anything, it just redistributes money that it extorts from productive people to less productive people. The nature of socialism leads to inefficiency. Compare the economic performance of France to the US and, say, Sweden, from the start of the Reaganomics experiment up to 2003.

real GDP/Capita in US in 1980 = $21,335.54
real GDP/Capita in France in 1980 = $16,217.39
real GDP/Capita in Sweden in 1980 = $17,164.86

French incomes are 76% of American incomes in 1980.

real GDP/Capita in US in 2003 = $34,223.17
real GDP/Capita in France in 2003 = $22,867.27
real GDP/Capita in Sweden in 2003 = $24,498.12

French incomes are 67% of American incomes in 2003.

Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in US = 60.4%
Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in France = 41.0%
Growth GDP/Capita between 1980 and 2003 in Sweden = 42.7%

Socialism is making the French poorer, in comparison to the US, over time.
Thats the best thing about socialism -- its goal is to ensure that everyone suffers equally.

Besides -- with all that "free" stuff, paid for "by the state", French income doesn't -need- to be as high.
:rofl
 
:yt

If your previous post really represent what you think in general then I feel incredibly sorry for you in so many ways you do not understand.
 
Yea but considering that the US growth was fuelled by getting into massive amounts of debt (personal and state), then I would not really brag about it :)

Anyways, GDP isnt all that matters. And you have to consider that people in the US in average also works 34% more than the French, which actually makes up for the gap.
 
You're right.
Now_ please tell me in what ways France is better than the United States. We can go ahead and eliminate the idea the France is better in anything to do with military (which almost includes all technologies). Enlighten me.
Here is where the thread went off track. Comparisons between the US and France.....COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT! This is about Germany and France, have any thoughts on that? Do you know the history between Germany and France, and territorial issues?
 
Back
Top Bottom