NationStates Jolt Archive

Which one do you think would win in a war without any outside help?

Because France would surrender.

Canada, because we all know they have a huge army in underground bunkers just waiting to pull a massive coup.

France.

Why: France got nukes. Canada doesn´t. ´nuff said.

France has a pretty decent army.

France has a pretty decent army.

Canada has an awesome army in hiding. And I doubt france would use nukes because there would be a massive nuclear retaliation probably by Bush, which would blow France into nothing, causing a canadian victory.

That is difficult. For Northern America, I would vote Canada, since it is the last democracy on the continent.

For France, that is difficult, their are so many as democratic states in Europe, I would say: a hyper Scandinavian state like Sweden, hmmm. great women to. But expensive alcohol and not a wine region.

And I doubt france would use nukes because there would be a massive nuclear retaliation probably by Bush, which would blow France into nothing, causing a canadian victory.


The question was:

Which one do you think would win in a war without any outside help?

And even without nukes, my money is on France.

hmmm. after further thought... let's look into this.

Past wars had france defeated and surrendering. but they did fight.
"Never doubt the courage of France... after all, they descovered that Snails were edible."


Canada population grew from American Draft Dodgers. Chances are, those people will also flee.
Canada is influenced by the US... so in a fight, they can be real Bastards.


Hmmm. I guess it would be a coin toss.

I'd say France, not because of a massive technological superiority in their armed forces, but because Canada's military has such a massive amount of borders and land to cover that they'd be fairly stretched out, and it would be easy for an enemy to infiltrate.

France has nukes... and snails.

Despite what most Americans would like to think, France has one of the best trained, best equipped, and most powerful militaries in the world. Even if France didn't have nukes, I don't think Canada would stand a chance, especially with so much land to try to defend.

The frogs would. The Canuck military sucks beyond all belief, and so does the French, but the French have nukes, and the Canucks, well, they have jack squat.

Canada has an awesome army in hiding.
But wouldn't Canada let itself be defeated, only to have the army come out of hiding when the French thought they were safely in control of the country?

And I doubt france would use nukes because there would be a massive nuclear retaliation probably by Bush, which would blow France into nothing, causing a canadian victory.


Hmm you need to study a bit.
The US can destroy the world a few hunderds of times, France can destroy it by their own retalation (I don't count the land based nuke plateau but only the subs) 6 times.(one time is enough for us humans.)

Guess non of you wins since even if you destroy their mainland in what would of course be a first attack by the US, their subs will destroy you...completely, and they have then still the capacity to destroy th erest of the globe if they want, and no it won't be snails that they'll send as a retaliation ;) )

So, Cheney gets out of the bunker and asks for Bordeaux wine and snails and garlic while the rest of the world is dead and he will live at max a few weeks.

Wow, you CRWN's are getting more ridicule by the post. :rolleyes: :D

Despite what most Americans would like to think, France has one of the best trained, best equipped, and most powerful militaries in the world. Even if France didn't have nukes, I don't think Canada would stand a chance, especially with so much land to try to defend.

They did in WW2 also and we all know how much that helped. Germans beat them in what......... about 3 weeks.

about 3 weeks.

1. You forget Dynamo.
2. And you forget us Belgians that were slaughterd in 3 weeks (Dutch in 4 DAYS) while our suicide at the Lys front, together with the French here helped to suceed Dynamo in wich 400.
000 French and Brits escaped. But Iunderstand that you don't understand history that does noth fit your CRWN agenda. You are the best example :D

Hmm, I think you are on Adolfs side, regarding your Nazi anti freedom post. :rolleyes:

War depends on several things, who invades who, how much warning the other side has of the invasion, whether they are trying to conquer each other or mearly blow the shit out of each other..

France, just simply because it has nukes

1. You forget Dynamo.
2. And you forget us Belgians that were slaughterd in 3 weeks (Dutch in 4 DAYS) while our suicide at the Lys front, together with the French here helped to suceed Dynamo in wich 400.
000 French and Brits escaped. But Iunderstand that you don't understand history that does noth fit your CRWN agenda. You are the best example :D

Hmm, I think you are on Adolfs side, regarding your Nazi anti freedom post. :rolleyes:

What nazi freedom post?????

What nazi freedom post?????

Guess that he saw your pro Nazi CRWN behaviour in your post :D
Admit, that is the most easy way instead of hiding, I would respect you more.
Your post speak for themselves...

It would be impractical for France to fight without and assistance, only Canada has the ability to project power around the globe. Since Canada is still a part of Britain there would be plenty of Navy support.

THe French may have nukes, but they wouldn't dare use them so close to the US - not to mention that in a Canadian invasion of France it would do little to get them out. The Canuks have a large territory, however much of it is inhospitable and unkind to machinery.

The thing going for Canada is the US. IF our neighbors to the north had a fight with France it is likely that many in the US would voluntarily run TO Canada to fight. So manpower would not be an issue.

Of course, the Canadian Hockey League would probably be able to wipe out most of France with nothing more than Q-tips, but that would be too easy.

a Canadian invasion of France .


:p :p :p

Wow that would be something, like Iceland invading the US :D
You're so funny :fluffle:

Nucks or Frogs? :confused:
Nucks, definitely. They have polar bears there.

1. You forget Dynamo.
2. And you forget us Belgians that were slaughterd in 3 weeks (Dutch in 4 DAYS) while our suicide at the Lys front, together with the French here helped to suceed Dynamo in wich 400.
000 French and Brits escaped. But Iunderstand that you don't understand history that does noth fit your CRWN agenda. You are the best example :D

Hmm, I think you are on Adolfs side, regarding your Nazi anti freedom post. :rolleyes:
I always understood it that it wasn't any grand Belgian stand which saved the troops at Dunkirk but rather Hitler's unwillingness to use his tanks and instead believe, as he would continually throughout the war, that his airforce could do much more than it actually could.

Just a wonder, anybody know where I could track down info on the French military? Specifically their nuclear weapons stocks and delivery systems?

Because I mainly want to know if they maintain a force of ICBMs, IRBMs, Strategic or tactical bombers.

Pointless without knowing all the constraints. Canada would probably win a long war to conquer a large land mass equal distace, with both sides having to transport troops, after all Canada does have it's own supplies of oil and could remain mechanized while fueling transport craft. Currently I believe Canada also has a slight edge on transport capability. French nukes are a problem, but Canada is pretty darn big and the French nuclear arsenel isn't, since France imports its uranium once they've used the arsenel they cannot make more, and they need the fissionable material to keep power to the people anyway, so I figure the French will not use it wanting to preserve thier fissionables for power unless they estimate they can defeat Canada decisively in one attack. I'd say Canada is in a better position because of resources for a long war, France isn't self sufficent as far as energy goes and if cut off from the rest of the world, will surrender rather than waste it's energy resources on a war with Canada.

try FAS.org for a listing of the french nuclear arsenel. not sure if it is FAS.org, but google the Federation of American Scientists if it isn't.

this link: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/france/nuke/index.html

It would be impractical for France to fight without and assistance, only Canada has the ability to project power around the globe. Since Canada is still a part of Britain there would be plenty of Navy support.

THe French may have nukes, but they wouldn't dare use them so close to the US - not to mention that in a Canadian invasion of France it would do little to get them out. The Canuks have a large territory, however much of it is inhospitable and unkind to machinery.

The thing going for Canada is the US. IF our neighbors to the north had a fight with France it is likely that many in the US would voluntarily run TO Canada to fight. So manpower would not be an issue.

Of course, the Canadian Hockey League would probably be able to wipe out most of France with nothing more than Q-tips, but that would be too easy.

Canada is NOT part of Britain.
As much as the government doesn't like to broadcast it Canada DOES have nuclear capability.
Large areas of Canada are remote however there isn't anyone there to have a war with.

canada would obuously win, france, well i'll just say that it can barely win a civil war against itself, let alone with help.
in the words of someone on a different foum, "what about France?' :cool:

France easily, as much as some like to speak ill of thier prowess in war, the French have one of the best militaries on Earth.

The frogs would. The Canuck military sucks beyond all belief, and so does the French, but the French have nukes, and the Canucks, well, they have jack squat.
Yeah... if they had the proper equipment, our military would kick ass.

Against who?

It would be impractical for France to fight without and assistance, only Canada has the ability to project power around the globe. Since Canada is still a part of Britain there would be plenty of Navy support.

THe French may have nukes, but they wouldn't dare use them so close to the US - not to mention that in a Canadian invasion of France it would do little to get them out. The Canuks have a large territory, however much of it is inhospitable and unkind to machinery.

The thing going for Canada is the US. IF our neighbors to the north had a fight with France it is likely that many in the US would voluntarily run TO Canada to fight. So manpower would not be an issue.

Of course, the Canadian Hockey League would probably be able to wipe out most of France with nothing more than Q-tips, but that would be too easy.
Britain = the island with Wales, England, and Scotland. Also, we're pretty much independant. The Queen is more of a figurehead.

I find it hard to envision Canada losing a war. Even if there were tanks rolling down the streets, most of us would STILL just be watching TV.

Or at least I would. :P

But.. Hmm.. I think Canada, purely out of national pride.

Britain = the island with Wales, England, and Scotland. Also, we're pretty much independant. The Queen is more of a figurehead.
Obviously he ment the UK.

She may just be a figurehead, but she still is your Queen (check yer currency), and does still have certain powers, even if they're never used. For instance, doesn't she still (technically) have the authority to dissolve your parliment? I don't have the time to look it up, but I seem to recall that she still has that power, since you're part of the UK, and royal subjects.

Don't feel bad, in this scenerio, that's a good thing, since aid from England wouldn't be "outside" help.

Obviously he ment the UK.

She may just be a figurehead, but she still is your Queen (check yer currency), and does still have certain powers, even if they're never used. For instance, doesn't she still (technically) have the authority to dissolve your parliment? I don't have the time to look it up, but I seem to recall that she still has that power, since you're part of the UK, and royal subjects.

Don't feel bad, in this scenerio, that's a good thing, since aid from England wouldn't be "outside" help.

Yes, the Queen is on our currency and is still the Queen. George Washington is on US currency, is he still president?
The Queen is a figurehead monarch with zero powers over Canada. She cannot dissolve Parliament, only the Prime Minister together with the Governor General can do that.
Canada is NOT part of the UK, Canada is part of the Commonwealth, which is all independant nations that were at one time part of the British Empire.

For your info
The UK = England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland.

Hmm you need to study a bit.
The US can destroy the world a few hunderds of times, France can destroy it by their own retalation (I don't count the land based nuke plateau but only the subs) 6 times.(one time is enough for us humans.)

Guess non of you wins since even if you destroy their mainland in what would of course be a first attack by the US, their subs will destroy you...completely, and they have then still the capacity to destroy th erest of the globe if they want, and no it won't be snails that they'll send as a retaliation ;) )

So, Cheney gets out of the bunker and asks for Bordeaux wine and snails and garlic while the rest of the world is dead and he will live at max a few weeks.

Wow, you CRWN's are getting more ridicule by the post. :rolleyes: :D
Yup...Even if The US rains nukes over France...the remaining French hiden silos,Subs and others would wipe out all Major american Cities, 100million lives smoked...The same thing If we nuke russia, China, or even the UK.

thats why they have veto power.

Why hasn't anyone mentioned the french foreign legion? Or the GIGN? Not to mention their para troopers. Those guys are scary @_@ not quite Spetsnaz but scary enough all the same.

http://www.gign.org/gign/gendarme.php (If you can't read french the babelfish it)

That aside, look at the facts.

Canada:
Military expenditures - dollar figure: $9,801.7 million (2003)
Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 1.1% (2003)

The total number of personnel working for the Canadian defense department is 83 766, including civilians.

France:
Military expenditures - dollar figure: $45,238.1 million (2003)
Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 2.6% (2003)

The total number of personnel working for the French defense department is 438 000, of which 356 000 are military, all professional, and 82 000 civilians.

It wouldnt be much of a fight, but I haven't looked into the technological capabilities, I think Canada is doing lots of research into areas like camoflage and at least they just copy american weapons rather than developing their own. But the odds are just overwhelmingly in France's favor.

Liberté Egalité Fraternité!

Canada is NOT part of Britain.

Thank you, I was about to post that. Not since 1982.

As for war with France, I'm not sure why this topic is even here except for conjecture. I mean it's not like it will ever happen. Canada & France have great respect for each other.

If I had to pick I'm going with my country obviously. France wouldn't use nukes.. and Canada wouldn't invade any country, so it would have to be a French invasion and thus fight on our turf. A lot of people think Canada is a total push-over, I believe our history of wars we have taken part in would say some thing quite different. Also even if you want to add the nuke factor, Canada has the technology and could probably have a nuke in about a month. We choose not to have nukes. If you invade some one's country you'd be surprised how fast people mobilize to fight for their country. It wouldn't be the first time Canada went up against great odds and pulled it off.

However since I like France and respect France and don't believe it would even been a possibility, it's all really rather moot.

Despite what most Americans would like to think, France has one of the best trained, best equipped, and most powerful militaries in the world. Even if France didn't have nukes, I don't think Canada would stand a chance, especially with so much land to try to defend.

Damn straight. Even though France's war record is in the gutter, they still have an awesome military force. Besides, they have the Forgein Legion, one of the most elite military units in the world. I have my money on France.

I wish Canada was part of Britain, so we could tell it to fuck off again.

Where would this war be? If it was in Canada it would probably go on for 10 years and then France would give up. Whose side would the Quebecois be on?

EDIT: wanna buy a submarine? only 2 previous owners...

France, Simply because they have the Foriegn Leigion. Basically the Criminals of the world, not too many questions asked, so long as you fight and will learn french your in. (silly info The Legion have the slowest march, they say they will only go forward so why rush to die! Nutters)

Canada, cause the french army would surrender and the french would never use their nukes. Greenpeace would storm their silos.

Besides the french are too busy with the Ivory coast at the moment.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/africa/11/06/ivorycoast.mobs/

Just a wonder, anybody know where I could track down info on the French military? Specifically their nuclear weapons stocks and delivery systems?

Try Google and type in what you're looking for but best result will come when you use French words, few time ago I found some stuff via their millitary sites.

I hate them both sooooo much...Canada. I hate France More...

It has been french national policy that anyone launching an attack on them, be it conventional military or NBC, will be nuked immeadiatly.

During the cold war they built a nuclear missile for 'defence', in a tactical third world war secenario, except that launched from france it could only hit west germany...

Also..they havent won any War in there life. No really, they've won battles, but no Wars. There the only country on earth that hasnt won any war...Besides..Canada is a HELL of a lot Larger then France.

Interesting.I would hazard a guess that they'd decide to call it a draw.
Political instability in both countries would lead to resistance movements.
As for the nuke thing.Well Its all fine and dandy to say that Canada aint got nukes,which MAYBE it doesnt.It is a leading technological country,and if it doesnt have a lot of nukes,or a least a few,i would guess that they realistically could whip them up relatively fast.
As for the land issue...Canada would be a second Russia.So big they could keep falling back.Masive lines for the french to cover,and the locals would blow the shit out of everything.Plus you have a point in Canadas favour cause a huge chunk of the population speaks french ,another bonus.
France on the other hand has a helluva reputation for being bad asses when they arent surrendering to Germany.Crazy fuckers.
I guess Quebec would welcome them with open arms....

It has been french national policy that anyone launching an attack on them, be it conventional military or NBC, will be nuked immeadiatly.

During the cold war they built a nuclear missile for 'defence', in a tactical third world war secenario, except that launched from france it could only hit west germany...Oh yea, thats real Effective, lol. Hell, that'd do more damage to then, then the Fucking Germans!

As a Canadian, I'd have to put my money on France.

How? There the only country to LOOSE aginst Itally.

A bit of info..

- World War I
- Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

Victory to Canada! Why, you ask?

1. Our helicopters. Sea Kings don't fly well, so we'll drop them on the enemy!
2. Our organization/procurement. Why do you think there are so many Tim Horton's? because they're secretly reinforced storehouses/bunkers, that's why!
3. Our history. Guerrilla warfare is in our blood. Ever since the war of 1812, Canadian-based military forces have been finding new and exciting ways of humiliating the enemy and destroying his stuff.
4. Our ethnic diversity. There's so many different cultures still thriving in Canada, that the enemy couldn't possibly hope to get a grip on our tactics. While the Quebec Seperatist Regiment might confuse them with their complicated regulations and movements, the Miramichi Battalion, full of Irish wahoos, would probably just charge them with tow-trucks and semis.

Oh yeah, we've got CSIS too. Good intelligence is a valuable asset.

Victory to Canada! Why, you ask?

1. Our helicopters. Sea Kings don't fly well, so we'll drop them on the enemy!
2. Our organization/procurement. Why do you think there are so many Tim Horton's? because they're secretly reinforced storehouses/bunkers, that's why!
3. Our history. Guerrilla warfare is in our blood. Ever since the war of 1812, Canadian-based military forces have been finding new and exciting ways of humiliating the enemy and destroying his stuff.
4. Our ethnic diversity. There's so many different cultures still thriving in Canada, that the enemy couldn't possibly hope to get a grip on our tactics. While the Quebec Seperatist Regiment might confuse them with their complicated regulations and movements, the Miramichi Battalion, full of Irish wahoos, would probably just charge them with tow-trucks and semis.

LOL.
Though you have one minor problem.
The French already have a foot hold in Quebec.

It would depend absolutely on whose soil it was fought on. Since they are so far apart, the attacker would lose. Specifically, France has a much shorter coastline to defend, so unless Canada could send all its troops by parachute, they would have trouble landing.

On the other hand, Canada is big, and cold. Sorta like Russia. Do you know what happened when Napoleon invaded Russia? The Russian troops fled back further inland, waiting for the invaders to advance, until Winter came. According to some accounts, more soldiers were killed by the weather than by the Russians.
Now, Canada is not as cold as Russia, and their cities are more to the coastline, but I still think they could simply get out of the way of the attacking troops until these run out of supplies. It's terribly hard to keep an army on hostile soil.

So, I'd say such a war would end in both sides eventually breaking off their attack after heavy losses of troops. Of course, that assumes that neither of the sides decides simply to bomb the other into next week.

A bit of info..

- World War I
- Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

That is old and you have not invented the quote.
Why not: "You know why the French have so much trees besides the ways?"
"So the Germans can march in the shade each time they invade" :)

BTW lucky enough the French let the GI sleep with the hookers of Napels (the GI's brought syphillis and gonoroe to Europe) where GI's did it with children younger then 13. that is why they repeated the pedophile raping in Nam and in their homelands in the midwest.
Result: the lowest IQ in the western world :eek: , in Missisipi the average IQ is about 83 amongst republican voters :eek: according to latest test. This IQ is seen as retarded by nations with much higher IQ's like for example France. :D

Yea..come over to America saying that, and you just earned Execution.

Yea..come over to America saying that, and you just earned Execution.

Well, just made litlle quoute in your own style?
You don't like it? Well, you had it comming with your post.

Sadly enough, the story about the IQ in Mississipi is true and that of the disseases brought by GI's in Europe and Nam to :)

You may think this thread is a joke, but with the hockey strike Canadians are getting restless. It's just a matter of time before they decide they want to annex St. Pierre et Miquelon (look it up, just south of Newfoundland) to complete the set, or at least to have something to do until next season.

Of course, Don Cherry would be reporting the hostilities.

Just a wonder, anybody know where I could track down info on the French military? Specifically their nuclear weapons stocks and delivery systems?

Hello,

Well I just "googled" a bit ... look here for more information :

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/france/ (browse the different sections)

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/France/FranceArsenalRecent.html

http://www.netmarine.net/forces/fost/index.htm

http://www.netmarine.net/armes/msbs/

http://www.netmarine.net/forces/fost/index.htm

http://www.ladocfrancaise.gouv.fr/brp/notices/004001630.shtml

http://www.ladocfrancaise.gouv.fr/dossier_international/nucleaire/index.shtml


Today our nuclear arsenal is composed of a :

1) naval element with 5 submarines :

- 2 older ones :
Indomptable (1976)
Inflexible (1985)
armed with 16 M4 missiles, each with 6 TN71 warheads of 150 kt, 5000 km range

- 3 new generation ones and 1 in construction :
Triomphant (1997)
Téméraire (1999)
Vigilant (2004)
Terrible (2010)
for the moment armed with 16 M45 missiles, each with 6 TN75 warheads of 150 kt, 6000 km range
In the next years the new M51 missile will enter in service : 6 very stealth TN75 warheads of 150 kt, 8000 km range

2) aerial component with Mirage 2000N (air force) and Super Etendard (navy) aircrafts that will be replaced by Rafale aircrafts.
They fire the ASMP missile : 1x TN81 warhead of 300kt, 300km range. The missile will be replaced by the ASMP-A missile of 500km range in 2007. We have around 150 of these missiles. The aircrafts are supported by C-135 tankers.

The former ground based components were all disbanded :
- about 40 silo-based missile (S4 missiles, 3500-4000km range with 3 TN35 warheads of 20 kt)
- tactical theater ballistic missiles : Pluton (on an AMX-30 chassis) and later Hadès (on a truck) - 15-25 kt missiles of about 150km range.
- nuclear test range in Mururoa dismantled and replaced by simulation programs

Regards,
The best soup in the world.

Which one do you think would win in a war without any outside help?
France would win. France has a larger, better funded military. Canada's military is decrepid and is on the verge of bankruptcy.

It would be strange first of all but here are my points

france

1. it has a well funded militry , i mean even traffic wardens have medals and guns

2. they haven't had a war in ages and could do with one
3. they would love to beat up america junior

canada

1 , the mounties and lumberjacks would beat a few soldiers
2 canada is vast , it would take ages to crush all resistance in canada , the french wouldn't be able to control it

3 the canadians would pour maple syrup over the french who would stick to the floor


and anyway

france practicly founded canada
it would take huge resources to get to the other country , the un would stop them , and neighbouring countries would hate the occupying country

2) aerial component with Mirage 2000N (air force) and Super Etendard (navy) aircrafts that will be replaced by Rafale aircrafts.
They fire the ASMP missile : 1x TN81 warhead of 300kt, 300km range. The missile will be replaced by the ASMP-A missile of 500km range in 2007. We have around 150 of these missiles. The aircrafts are supported by C-135 tankers.



150 300kiloton, only in your Mirages...wow, prepared to blew up the world.

I'm a Canadian and I'll tell you honestly, France could do it. Canada could not. But I'm not uptight about it, as neither country would allow a situation to get so far out of hand that war would be necessary.

150 300kiloton, only in your Mirages...wow, prepared to blew up the world.

449 Warheads in total ;) , the attacker will be destroyed, weather it is the US (more likely the next tensions in the future) or Russia in the cold war. :)

France no doubt

And this come from a Canadian army reservist :P

"I'd rather have a German Division in front of me than a French one behind."
- General George S. Patton

The only elite unit of the French military is the "Foreign" Legion.

The problem is that the french military is not in as good a shape as sheer numbers say : for exemple, less than half of the french helicopters can fly, same is true for the Leclerc tanks who can't ride due to lack of pieces for repairs.

Let's take a look at the other factors :

1. Fleet :

The french have a more powerfull fleet, including an aircraft carrier with Rafale planes who are more than a match for the F-18. But the french don't have enough planes right now.

The canadian fleet could not stop the french surface fleet with what they have. And the french subs would tear the guts out of the canadian fleet before she could begin to do damages

The french also have more transport and supply ships including assault ships carrying some helicopters, which is good. The canadians don't have the same transport capacity.

Air Force :

The french have more plane. Mirages 2000 are a good match for F-18 and land and naval based Rafale are much better. The french have a very good air lift capacity with the C-160 Transall in huge numbers. The frenchs have E-2C and E-3F radar and air control planes.

Land forces :

The french Leclerc tank is a killer, the rolls royce of the tanks, probably better than a M1A2 Abraham. The french also own some good lighter armored vehicules. Their land forces well trained professionals, with some elite forces like the Marsoins ( = SEALS ), Foreign Legion, commandos forces like GIGN, ... But the most important thing is that they have more manpower. And I think ( but did not check ) that the french population is still bigger than the canadian one.

Economy/Supplies

The french can produce in-house everithing they need : new planes, tanks, subs, ships, ... something Canada can't.

All this makes me think that in a 1vs1 fight, without help from anybody, France would win.

EDIT : And I forgot about the helicopters : french have Tiger attack helos, that can compare favourably with the AH-64 and the Ka-50/52 and would be a great + to the invasion force

Besides..Canada is a HELL of a lot Larger then France.
Yes, and France has nearly twice the population of Canada. What's your point?

Niether. They would have to combine to form:

Francada! Or CanaFrance.

France, because they have a bigger, better military, less land to defend and more people to help out.

Hmmm France they have access to more advanced technology, such as the new Eurofighter Typhoon (unless the US lends Canada a few F-22s, aint nothing taking them down) Better and bigger armed forces etc. The problems they suffered against Germany was because they expected the attack to come over the border, not through Beligium.
Somebody said Canada could call on help from England? Screw that! You want Scotland's help (more likely anyway, alot of Scots were among the first Canadians) all the UK forces in combat roles in Iraq are Scottish 'Black Watch' troops, most of the legendary SAS are Scottish and the UK's nuclear 'Trident' submarines are based here...
Intrestingly not once has any nation ever conqured all of Scotland...

France and Canada aren't big warfaring nations. Rather than have a big bloody war, I think it is more likely they would negotiate some sort of peace treaty, in which case they would both "win".

That is difficult. For Northern America, I would vote Canada, since it is the last democracy on the continent.

Do you ever think before you post?


So, is this a hypothetical war between Canada and France? If so, Canada in a walk.

Any war?

Canada is still more manly than France. :)

You are discounting the fact the Canada has never had a need for a military, France has. Canada has never played a major part in any war, they just kinda help out. Seeing as Canada has built it's army around treaties with bigger nations it's unfair to say without outside help. But because of the hockey strike I think the Canadians are pissed off enough to beat up France. And if all else fails they'd just club them like baby seals.

define the term: "win the war"?


France has double the population of Canada, and about five times the military budget (And yes, I am a firm proponent of Canada beefing up our military).

France has the capability to project force across the Atlantic through it's naval battle group. Canada would NEED to sink their fleet... preferably without our subs spontaneously combusting first (Thanks Britain)!

Could France take out Canada's military head to head? Yep. Although we would damage them too.

Could Canada occupy France? No. Nor do we want to. We make perfectly good wine and cheese right here. So we would not win a war with them.

Could France occupy Canada? No. Not a chance. Canadians would make the Iraqi insurgency look like a garden party, because there is not a one of us who would look on this as anything other than an invasion. There would be no "well, they got rid of our dictator and hopefully they will soon leave" feelings.

Not to mention that one other critical fact these days:

The NHL is on strike.

Normally Canadians do the civilized thing and leave their fighting on the ice where it belongs. Without that outlet, we have some very grumpy citizens who will happily lay the lumber down on anyone who gets in our way....


:D

Canada is not Russia - the vast majority of the Canadian population is located within spitting distance of our Southern neighbours. Nukes are completely out of the equation since the areas you're more likely to nuke are close to the US border, thus attacking the US.

The Leclerc is NOT a match for the Abrams, the Leopard II is closer but Germans have conscript crews. If our government got off its arse and purchased real vehicles instead of recommissioning the Leopard C1s we've got now.....

For that matter the Leclerc wouldn't last that long, we're getting Javelins from the US.

Canada does NOT have the capability to get troops to France by itself, so any war is a France invading Canada scenario. The Maritimes fall fairly easily, Quebec is garrisoned cautiously because no one knows whose side they're on (except Montreal, which is sieged - people in Montreal tend to be quite militant and I've heard more than once that if Quebec seperates from Canada, Montreal seperates from Quebec)

All that's not going to be quick, you've got reservists and regular forces forming up, and your strategic weapons can't be employed to their full effect because of the Hyperpower next door. Sounds to me like the French get another Vietnam, or Algieria - how many of us will they massacre before they give up and go home? Will we have to kill another 20,000 Legionaires, like at Dien Bien Phu? Call it the battle of Ottawa.

It could go either way but I think people are vastly overestimating French capabilities - the French do have technological edge over us, but they had better have damned good engineers and logistics becase the main line of resistance is closer to Moscow than Minsk or Kiev. The Mirage can't land on dirt strips.

And if the Quebecois rise up to join the French... well the CANDU reactors DO produce weapons grade plutonium, a little scorched earth isn't that bad for setting right historical wrongs

...
Intrestingly not once has any nation ever conqured all of Scotland...
WOW...the Scots must be very proud...how big is the Scotish Army?

France has double the population of Canada, and about five times the military budget (And yes, I am a firm proponent of Canada beefing up our military)Are you a firm proponent to take money from healthcare? or do you wanna raise taxes to France's level?

Sure France could win....But That War will never ever take place...

All in all Canada is smarter...they give more services with less taxes...How? they dont waste too much money in the Army....they sign treaties, save the taxpayers money, and Prosper.

When I feel the urge to do Mucho-Macho Soldier...I Play Computer War games....I see lotsa blood and Fire and Flying Limbs and explosions and murder and Pandemonium ....Without actually having to kill anyone.

For the Record I kinda like Violent movies and VideoGames... :mp5: :sniper: :D

Canada, cause the french army would surrender and the french would never use their nukes. Greenpeace would storm their silos.

Besides the french are too busy with the Ivory coast at the moment.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/africa/11/06/ivorycoast.mobs/

Just want to mention that CNN just showed me how stupid they are with the picture in the link, the one that showed the armoured car and called it a "tank".. wow amazing how they DO NOT know what one of the best military weapons of all time is!!

As for this topic...

I would say Canada, I am Canadian though...

WOW...the Scots must be very proud...how big is the Scotish Army?

Hmmm we have 4 divisions that are part of the larger UK army, one of which is in Iraq. Not sure of numbers maybe a few 100,000 from a population of roughly 5 million. The comment was backing up the statements that the Canadainans could disappear into the landscape and attack at will, historically its we have done. As a tactic it works damn well, most armies will get sick of it and give up sooner or later.

Do you ever think before you post?


So, is this a hypothetical war between Canada and France? If so, Canada in a walk.:)
Look who's talking?



Canada is still more manly than France. :)

Sure :rolleyes: :


http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/france/ (browse the different sections)

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Fra...enalRecent.html

http://www.netmarine.net/forces/fost/index.htm

http://www.netmarine.net/armes/msbs/

http://www.netmarine.net/forces/fost/index.htm

http://www.ladocfrancaise.gouv.fr/b...004001630.shtml

http://www.ladocfrancaise.gouv.fr/d...ire/index.shtml


Today our nuclear arsenal is composed of a :

1) naval element with 5 submarines :

- 2 older ones :
Indomptable (1976)
Inflexible (1985)
armed with 16 M4 missiles, each with 6 TN71 warheads of 150 kt, 5000 km range

- 3 new generation ones and 1 in construction :
Triomphant (1997)
Téméraire (1999)
Vigilant (2004)
Terrible (2010)
for the moment armed with 16 M45 missiles, each with 6 TN75 warheads of 150 kt, 6000 km range
In the next years the new M51 missile will enter in service : 6 very stealth TN75 warheads of 150 kt, 8000 km range

2) aerial component with Mirage 2000N (air force) and Super Etendard (navy) aircrafts that will be replaced by Rafale aircrafts.
They fire the ASMP missile : 1x TN81 warhead of 300kt, 300km range. The missile will be replaced by the ASMP-A missile of 500km range in 2007. We have around 150 of these missiles. The aircrafts are supported by C-135 tankers.

The former ground based components were all disbanded :
- about 40 silo-based missile (S4 missiles, 3500-4000km range with 3 TN35 warheads of 20 kt)
- tactical theater ballistic missiles : Pluton (on an AMX-30 chassis) and later Hadès (on a truck) - 15-25 kt missiles of about 150km range.
- nuclear test range in Mururoa dismantled and replaced by simulation programs

Regards,
The best soup in the world.

Though I'm Canadian, I have to go with France. The Canadian millitary is in just too bad a shape to really defent the entire country properly, plus France has got nukes.

Just to complete:

http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_europeen/albion/albion_operationel.htm

http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_europeen/albion/albion_aujourdhui.htm

http://www.stratisc.org/partenaires/ihcc/ihcc_nuc1_tdm.htm

BUT: the base have been shut down in 1997, due to the larger submarine attack force and the huge amounts of nukes that the air force (armée de l'air) can bring about anywhere.

You are discounting the fact the Canada has never had a need for a military, France has. Canada has never played a major part in any war, they just kinda help out. Seeing as Canada has built it's army around treaties with bigger nations it's unfair to say without outside help. But because of the hockey strike I think the Canadians are pissed off enough to beat up France. And if all else fails they'd just club them like baby seals.

What on earth do you mean NEVER.
Canada is the only country to succesfully invade the US, and burn Washington DC to the ground, thank you very much. Why do you think it's called the "White House" ...Cause the Americans painted it White to cover the scorch marks after the Canadians set it on fire. (True Story)
It's the Canadian military that has stopped the Greeks and Turkish sides of Cyprus from dragging the Mediterranean into a war for the last 30 years.
Right, Canada has necer played a part in any major war...tell that to the Dutch after Canadian troops liberated the Netherlands from the Nazis.

What have the French done. In WW2 they sat on their butts and pretended to be Nazis and waited for the rest of the world to bail them out. After everyone else did the dying that prick DeGaulle rode through the Arc de Triomph pretending to be the liberator.

Canada may not have the largest military but they specialize, it was Canadian snipers that took out the enemy in the mountains of Afghanistan, not American bombs and certainly not the bloody French.

What on earth do you mean NEVER.
Canada is the only country to succesfully invade the US, and burn Washington DC to the ground, thank you very much. Why do you think it's called the "White House" ...Cause the Americans painted it White to cover the scorch marks after the Canadians set it on fire..WOW...thats more impresing than Osama... :sniper:

WOW...thats more impresing than Osama... :sniper:
There's a vast difference between a declared state of war between two nations and a terrorist attack upon civilians.
But that raises a question, the United States always makes a big deal about being attacked by Japan without a formal declaration of war (Day of infamy)
What official declaration of war exsists between the US and Afghanistan or Iraq? (off topic I know, but perhaps I missed something)

....
What official declaration of war exsists between the US and Afghanistan...Yes, Bush Used Al-Jazeera to deliver this VIDEO War Ultimatum to Afghanistan.

see for yourself:
http://www.madblast.com/oska/humor_bin.swf

Yes, Bush Used Al-Jazeera to deliver this VIDEO War Ultimatum to Afghanistan.

see for yourself:
http://www.madblast.com/oska/humor_bin.swf

Hadn't seen that before, all make sense now lol
Suprised George didn't get Jeb to arrange a no bid contract to Disneyworld for the animation though. lol

France. It has nukes

France. It has nukes
Oh right, and Canada really only builds Candu Nuclear reactors purely for its love of providing electricity to 3rd world countries.
Canada allowed the US to set up the DEW line (Distant Early Warning) across its Arctic without ever worrying about its own security.
If you believe either I have some prime Florida real estate for you.

Having nukes doesn't mean you win the war... If France uses nukes, Every nation with nukes will join in. afterall, nuking Canada will affect the US so the US WILL get involved... Besides, for all the disagreements, US and Canada are good allies.

Having nukes doesn't mean you win the war......Yes it does , If Germany had developed Nukes a couple years earlier...They would had won.

Go Canada! thanx for all the beer, women and HOCKEY!

Having nukes doesn't mean you win a war, just as long as you both have them. When both nations have an equal capabilty it becomes a "Mexican Standoff" on the nuclear threat. Would Truman have used Nukes on Japan if he knew the same would happen to LA or New York?
And despite our difference in Politics Canada and the US share this continent and I hope the words on the Peace Arch between our border, not far from where I sit always is true. "may these gates never be closed".

Go Canada! thanx for all the beer, women and HOCKEY!
No problemo, glad we could help.

Having nukes doesn't mean you win a war, just as long as you both have them.If you link to any NewsSite that says Canada has Nukes...

I WILL CONCEDE FASTER THAN THAT A DEMOCRAT CANDIDATE :D

But think about this, would the French speaking Canadians go with France or Canada?

But think about this, would the French speaking Canadians go with France or Canada?
It does not matter, the French have Nukes...
And all the "gun is bigger than yours" doesn not matter either...cos they will never ever engage in War.

well they say they have nuclear power stations but how do we know what they're doing with them...they have loads of fissionable materials in their mountains...I bet they could put something together if they had to, but they'd have to sneak it to the other side somehow.

France on the other hand has tactical nukes ready to go, and a means to deliver them. Blowing up that island in the Pacific a few years back was meant to make an impression.

I voted in favour of France, who am I kidding?

If you link to any NewsSite that says Canada has Nukes...

I WILL CONCEDE FASTER THAN THAT WUSS...kERRY :D

I'm not aware of any news site that says Canada has nukes.
But consider this, India built its nuclear weapons from the technology it obtained from buying Canadian Candu reactors.
We had Nuclear weapons in Churchill, Manitoba 30 years ago and no news site reported that either.
Let the French roll the dice and guess if we might have them.

...
We had Nuclear weapons in Churchill, Manitoba 30 years ago and no news site reported that either.
This is not RP war....either you have Nukes or you dont.

Maybe it's because I'm 'less than sober' right now, but my money goes towards Canada. Why? because they've got a warship (http://www.satirewire.com/news/feb02/warship.shtml). And guns, apparently. If they've been able to hide this info from the world, imagine what else they've kept secret... Plus, the whole French surrender issue.

I feel bad having contributed to this debate. It's like betting on a cripple-fight... :cool:

This is not RP war....either you have Nukes or you dont.
And i have previously stated that Canada has nuclear weapons, no RP here.
You are now asking me to find a source that backs that up.
I have no intention of doing so, I don't need to because I was in Churchill when the weapons were there.
There are numerous articles that show that India used the Candu reactor to build its nuclear weapons, so I can prove from another source that Canada has had the ability for many years and only a fool would believe that a nation would forsake its own security to gain an endorsment from Greenpeace.
Bring it on France.........

Maybe it's because I'm 'less than sober' right now, but my money goes towards Canada. Why? because they've got a warship (http://www.satirewire.com/news/feb02/warship.shtml). And guns, apparently. If they've been able to hide this info from the world, imagine what else they've kept secret... Plus, the whole French surrender issue.

I feel bad having contributed to this debate. It's like betting on a cripple-fight... :cool:
On the invasion plan of the US i'll bet Iowa is right after Rhode Island on places Canada can beat up lol. (I'm glad glad someone else is less than sober....I have to go to bed lol)

On the invasion plan of the US i'll bet Iowa is right after Rhode Island on places Canada can beat up lol. (I'm glad glad someone else is less than sober....I have to go to bed lol)Hey, Iowa has places of interest that would make it a prime target for invasion... like our... umm... corn museums. And our... uhh... (do we have anything here other then corn?)

Hey, Iowa has places of interest that would make it a prime target for invasion... like our... umm... corn museums. And our... uhh... (do we have anything here other then corn?)

Maybe a few nuclear missile silos or government bunkers. Heck they had the government's nuclear defense bunker under the Greenbrier Hotel here in WV. It seems they like to pick the places with the least amount of apparent worth to put fortifications. :D

Commies! Bastards! I hate em! ARGGGGGGGHHHHH! NIYHAAAAAAA! COMMIE BASTARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Darling supper's ready?"

Coming dear!

Canada: pacifist liberal country, but could probably kick arse (ass) if they needed to.
France: one word: cheese-eating-surrender-monkeys.

Originally Posted by Zeppistan
France has double the population of Canada, and about five times the military budget (And yes, I am a firm proponent of Canada beefing up our military)

Are you a firm proponent to take money from healthcare? or do you wanna raise taxes to France's level?

Sure France could win....But That War will never ever take place...

All in all Canada is smarter...they give more services with less taxes...How? they dont waste too much money in the Army....they sign treaties, save the taxpayers money, and Prosper.



Why does one need to make it an either-or scenario?

The primary cost to beef up Canada's military is in hardware acquisitions. We have well trained personel, we just dont' equip them very well so that is where the biggest hurdle lies right now. After that, the addition of another couple of divisions of manpower, and the increased maintainence requirements is a much smaller yearly budget item.

Right now the military budget is about $10B per year. Meanwhile, we just announced a $9.1Billion surplus to be applied to the national debt. Over a decade of budget surpluses now, so we obviously have our financial house in order from a spending standpoint.

Now, if we had instead for the past decade taken half of each surplus to re-equip our military with better hardware (say about a $30B extra investment by now), we would be able to have a more positive role in dealing with world issues. And once the force is re-equiped then if the additional costs to maintain the better force came in at around $4B/year (almost 50% increase on our yearly military budget), this still only equates to a hair over a 1% increase in Federal expenditures ($342.7B total Federal budget in 2003), so this would not make a huge impact on taxation levels - especially for a country that has, as mentioned, been running yearly surpluses and which has also lessened tax rates in most Provinces and as well on Federal income taxes over the past few years.


Canada right now is in the position where it does a wonderful job giving our advice on how to deal with some ongoing world issues, but being unable to contribute very much it comes across as a constant "hey - this needs to be done... which one of YOU is going to take it on?" Eventually people stop listening to someone who plays that role. You either step up to the plate yourself or you stop telling other people that they need to step up.

Call me crazy, but I think having the ability to put our men where our policies are puts us in a much better position to help direct the future of the world.


Which is not to say that we don't also have some funding issues for education and health care that need to be addressed, just pointing out that a lot can be done while maintaining a fairly tax-neutral position with our current budget situation. And as long as we keep our budget at least balanced, then our debt-to-GDP ratio will continue to drop as our economy keeps expanding, and we can still make additional paydowns in particularly good years.

Yes, the Queen is on our currency and is still the Queen. George Washington is on US currency, is he still president?
The Queen is a figurehead monarch with zero powers over Canada. She cannot dissolve Parliament, only the Prime Minister together with the Governor General can do that.
Canada is NOT part of the UK, Canada is part of the Commonwealth, which is all independant nations that were at one time part of the British Empire.

For your info
The UK = England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland.
You seem to forget that she does have the powers to dissolve parliament, and remove power for the PM. However, that job goes to the Governor General, who is the queen's representative in Canada.

Also..they havent won any War in there life. No really, they've won battles, but no Wars. There the only country on earth that hasnt won any war...Besides..Canada is a HELL of a lot Larger then France.

Read a history book sometime. They won WWI.

A bit of info..

- World War I
- Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.
Alrighty then...

France would defanatly win. The Canadian military could probably be brougt down by the students at my high school (about 1,500 people) :p. Probably not. But France's military is better trained and better equipt, not to mention their nuclear capabilities.

The Canadian economy isn't currently doing so hot, so the military is what gets the budget cuts.
In other words, the Canadian military doesn't have the money they once had, which means they've probably disbanded many troops. :headbang:

France, however, has a semi-controlled economy (ok, maybe even less than semi). Their military is just fine. If they can hold off Nazi Germany in WWII, they can hold off Canada. ;)

This is all irrelevant anyway. If either of these nations attacked each other, just about every other nation in the U.N. would declare war on the aggressor.

You seem to forget that she does have the powers to dissolve parliament, and remove power for the PM. However, that job goes to the Governor General, who is the queen's representative in Canada.

I stand by my statement. It is the Governor General who, upon a request from the Prime Minister, dissolves Parliament. The Governor General is a political appointment made by THE PRIME MINISTER.
The Queen does not have ANY power over Canada.
The British Government, likewise. has no power over, nor obligation to, Canada. Queen Victoria gave Canada independence over it's affairs about 135 years ago, and Trudeau repatriated the Constitution in 1982.

I don't think Canada would stand a chance, especially with so much land to try to defend.

They really wouldn't bother to defent most of it. Lets face it the best defence for them would to be to hold out in some major strong holds and wait for winter. The geograph and weather are totally agains the French.

I am Canadian, and I say Canada. We have a lot of stuff hidden away in our country, its huge and easy to find hiding places. Nuclear weapons? I'm pretty sure we have em, we used to, and they don't just disapear (well, maybe they do, but this isn't Russia). Even if we don't we have the capability to whip some up in no time flat. A large amount of the scientists who worked on the Manhatten project were Canadian. The russians had to spy on Canada in order to develop their nuclear capabilities. Our military is historically small and underfunded in times of peace. At the start of WWII we only had 3000 people in our military and only enough munitions in the entire country to fight for a sinlge 90 minute engagement. By the end of the war we had 1.1 million people in our military (out of a population of 22 million, and all but about 2000-3000 were volunteers) as well as the worlds 3rd largest Navy. We just like to make people underestimate us :p

The Canadians, but only because the French have not managed to win a war without foreign assistance for oh...the past 1000 years (no exaggeration here).

Their [France's] military is just fine. If they can hold off Nazi Germany in WWII, they can hold off Canada. ;)
They couldn't hold off Nazi Germany...they were occupied for 4(ish) years.

Let's see; the French got their armpits sunburned twice surrendering to the Germans. The Canadians twice helped liberate France. Ummm! My money is on Canada.
Love those northern neighbors.

I stand by my statement. It is the Governor General who, upon a request from the Prime Minister, dissolves Parliament. The Governor General is a political appointment made by THE PRIME MINISTER.
The Queen does not have ANY power over Canada.
The British Government, likewise. has no power over, nor obligation to, Canada. Queen Victoria gave Canada independence over it's affairs about 135 years ago, and Trudeau repatriated the Constitution in 1982.

Dude I hate to tell you but, you're wrong.

http://www.gg.ca/governor_general/role_e.asp

The french are "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" = Canada all the way, They have great beer as well =P

I'm sure Canada could get nukes,the only reason they dont have any now is becuase they belive in peace.France would never wanna harm Canada,Canada liberated them 2 times.
And Bozzy CANADA IS NOT PART OF BRITIAN!

and Bryle france didnt hold off nazi germany in WWII they surrended and were liberated on D-DAY thats where the whole thing took place in FRANCE becuase they were captured by the germans

Quebec would go crazy if canada ever went to war with france,france would be able to go into canada from quebec becuase they would allow them in then quebec would become part of france

Quebec would go crazy if canada ever went to war with france,france would be able to go into canada from quebec becuase they would allow them in then quebec would become part of france

Actually Quebecois associate themselves less with France than Anglos do with Britain, mainly because they've been here quite a bit longer. The only thing they have in common really is language and (for the most part) religion.

France has more people and a better military.

France, Canada has no army. Well actually Canada has one, but compared to other nations Canada does not.

This was some serious grave-digging folks! :sniper:

not another one of these petty who would win threads.

But Iunderstand that you don't understand history that does noth fit your CRWN agenda.
What is CRWN?

Definitaly Canada would win. France would nuke them, but hell the USA will retaliate, mainly because we don't like France so much but they probably hit to close for comfort.

As much as the government doesn't like to broadcast it Canada DOES have nuclear capability.
Nuclear capability, maybe, but no nuclear weapons. Last I heard we only had 4 nuclear power plants, but they may have been shut down by now. Of course, they're all in ontario anyway :rolleyes:

Definitaly Canada would win. France would nuke them, but hell the USA will retaliate, mainly because we don't like France so much but they probably hit to close for comfort.
Have you read the part in the qustion saying "Without any foreign assistance"? Sure the USA woud retaliate if a nation was nuked, but if nobody helped anybody, it would be different.

Yeah... if they had the proper equipment, our military would kick ass.
Yeah, it's not skill we lack. Just conservative leadership. And I don't see that ever changing.

French nukes. 'nuff said.

I hate them both sooooo much...Canada. I hate France More...
What a well-phrased, intelligent, and well-supported post...

<snip>.
Swilatia , stick to the recent topics. Don't go back 8 months to dig up long-forgotten (and best-forgotten) topics.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Game Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop