MARC said:
8) Yes, people always think USA is the best. But wait a moment and consider this -- to be in France is safer than to be in USA? France has prevented any attacks by her enemies on her. Yet, the US has not been able to prevent or foresee attacks on her soil (Sep 11-- pardon me!).
So it's not the size that matters but the strength of a military force must take into consideration its effective deterrence from enemy attacks. If it is successful in this aspect and has prevented any enemy from doing damages on its own soil, then it seems that the military force of that country is stronger. :?:
well, i would really have to consider this: does France have any viable targets within its borders that would offer a terrorist the chance to make a statement? I mean, the twin towers and the pentagon were really big, reconisable items that when took down, served not only as a warning to the US of the terrorist might, and the relatively relaxed security of our own country, but equally served to wake up the other countries as well, with out having to repeat the performance.
additionally, I believe that France has always had a good repetoire with the middle east: the country has served as a haven for iran dissidents when the Shah was in power, and I imagine it is a haven for countless other groups do to its permissive society and government. Its a good thing that France does this: I don't think any other civilized country in the world, with the possible exception of some countries in south america, offers such a place of refuge.
Now we have a comparison based on the effectiveness based on deterrence. I agree, one of the indicators of effectiveness is the lack of an armed incursion by an aggressor. But does this apply to the application of force by surprise? would the effectiveness of the military force in this instance be also judged by its response?
Currently, the US is involved in at least four areas where they are supporting standing armys actively involved with conflicts other than total war: kosovo, S. Korea, Afganistan, and Iraq. Now, looking at the main scope, I see that france is supporting a few areas, but nothing to the response and depth that the US is. And the US has a larger reserve waiting in the wings.
Now France does have something going for it: their special police and army units do and can hit the terrorists back real good. They really do not screw around. They know it: the terrorists know it. and they don't mess with them.
And yes: despite everything said and done, France and the US are allies. where it counts: not in the newspapers, not in the seats of government, but in just the normal people of the two countries. One country with people that remember and are grateful for the help it got when it needed it: one group remembering fighting for people worth fighting for. My grandfather fought in WWI in france: he said that the French officers were truly :cen: but the french foot soldiers were good, and worth fighting with. and he told me the french civilians shared what they had, with nary a complaint.
bottom line: the real proof of your armies effectiveness is if you still exist as a nation. we don't cave in or roll over if a hurricane or a earthquake hits us: its just another stone in the path.