France vs United Kingdom

[Sophian]

It would be a stalemate for the simple reason that neither side could conquer the other. The Royal Navy is ridiculously superior to the French and would have sunk the entirety of the French fleet within a few weeks of the war starting for minimal losses, meaning the French could never invade Britain.

However the air war would be a draw. The RAF and French air force would cancel each other out, I personally believe the Rafale is far superior to the Eurofighter and would win that facet of the air war, but the Type 45 Destroyers would prevent the French extending their airpower over the channel. But the French air superiority over France would prevent the British from invading.

So without resorting to a nuclear option, which is frankly impossible for either side, the war descends into a costly stalemate.

Britain would just have to mobilize their legions of unemployed Chavs.
''A six pack of Stella and a holiday in Benidorm if you trash the fuck out of Paris.''

I expect the war to last approximately twelve hours.

I had no clue what a chav was until I looked it up because of this post. I guess its a European thing?

[Saint-Thor]

OP, are you really doing this here? For anything regarding "Britain vs something", the very compostion of this forum is a bias in and of itself. I should know, it's the same thing on the French forums, although their arguments tend to be more solid than Internet crap like "white flag".

[Alien Space Bats]

On 7 September 1746 the inhabitants of Madras woke to find a French fleet sitting offshore - and an expedition of soldiers being landed on the shore. The French ships opened fire on the town - but with little effect, struggling to find the correct range and by nightfall a large portion of the garrison had been lulled into a false sense of security.

The following morning the French resumed their bombardment from both land and shore, this time with much more accuracy. The fortifications of Madras had been poorly constructed and were largely unable to resist such an attack. As the number of British casualties grew, the morale of the discipline of the troops collapsed. After a direct strike on the liquor stores, a number of soldiers abandoned their posts and drank themselves into a stupor. Civilians from the town took their places manning the defences - but it was clear resistance was collapsing.

On 9 September the Governor of Madras, Nicholas Morse sued for peace.

— Wikipedia Article on the "Battle of Madras" (1746)

Yes, I can just see that, Mark it down as one of the finer moments in Britain's long and storied military history.

Just about everybody out there has humiliated themselves in battle at some point in time or another.

Probably a Scottish regiment.

(of course; given the location and time period, they were most likely East India Co Sepoys.)

Sepoys, eh? I'm guessing otherwise.

Apparently getting totally drunk was standard behavior for British colonial garrisons...

[Governor] De Bouillé carefully maintained a facade of peace in his dealings with [local British] authorities while he began preparing his forces on Martinique. On 2 September he and Lieutenant Governor Stuart signed an agreement that formally prohibited privateering crews to plunder. The next day de Bouillé sent one of his officers to Dominica to see whether a Royal Navy frigate was still anchored in Prince Rupert's Bay (near present-day Portsmouth). Stuart, suspicious of the man, had him questioned and then released. On 5 September de Bouillé was informed that the frigate had sailed for Barbados. He immediately moved to launch his invasion. Some Frenchmen (some British sources suggest they were French soldiers infiltrated onto the island) gained entry to the battery at Cachacrou that evening, plied its garrison with drink, and poured sand into the touchholes of the fort's cannons, temporarily rendering them useless. De Bouillé had in fact infiltrated some agents onto the island who had convinced some of the local French-speaking militia to abandon their duties when called up.

After sunset on 6 September, 1,800 French troops and 1,000 volunteers departed Martinique aboard the frigates Tourterelle, Diligente, and Amphitrite, the corvette Étourdie, and a flotilla of smaller vessels. (Sources describing the action give significantly varying numbers for the size of the French force. The numbers here are from de Bouillé's report of the action; some British sources claim his force numbered as much as 4,500.) The first point of attack was the battery at Cachacrou, where the British garrison, befuddled by drink and with inoperative cannons, was overcome without significant resistance around dawn on 7 September. Two of the 48th Regiment's soldiers were driven over the ramparts and fell to their deaths. After securing the battery the French fired cannons and sent signal rockets skyward to signal their allies. These actions also alerted Lieutenant Governor Stuart at Roseau, and the alarm was immediately raised. Many of the French Dominican militia failed to muster, as arranged. About 100 militia ended up mustering for duty, and were deployed among Roseau's defences.

The French proceeded to land more troops between Cachacrou and Roseau, with the objective of gaining the high ground above the capital. The main force of 1,400 men was landed about 2 miles (3.2 km) south of Roseau near Pointe Michel, with heavy fire from the hill batteries resulting in 40 casualties. De Bouillé landed with another 600 at Loubiere, between Pointe Michel and Roseau, while another 500 landed north of Roseau, and the fleet's frigates moved to bombard Roseau's defences. The French briefly captured the coastal fort at Loubiere, but were three times driven out by fire from above. They ended up withdrawing until forces were able to reach and capture the hill batteries. By noon, the French occupied the high ground above the capital, and Lieutenant Governor Stuart realised the situation was hopeless.

Negotiations followed, and Stuart and de Bouillé signed the terms of capitulation at about 3:00 pm. The proceedings were interrupted by one of the French frigates, whose captain, apparently unaware of the proceedings, fired on Fort Young, where the British flag was still flying. The two commanders rushed to the fort to prevent further exchanges of gunfire before they completed the agreement. The French then formally took control of Roseau. The British regulars were made prisoners of war, and the militia were released to return home. De Bouillé, who was interested in keeping on good terms with the population, did not allow his troops to plunder the town. Instead, he levied a fee of £4,400 on the island's population that was distributed among his men.

— Wikipedia Article on the "Invasion of Dominica" (1778)

AFAIK, there weren't many Sepoys — or Scotsmen, for that matter — living in Norfolk (home of the 45th Regiment) back in the 18th Century.

[SaorAlba]

Most advanced in the world is probably a bit much, the US might have a word. Not that that's a good thing, but it does spend an incredible amount on ours.

But I admit, I'm mainly basing my assumption on the surface fleet, the UK, for example, lacks the aircraft carrier, and has been downsizing its fleet to save money.

The Astute is the most advanced sub in the world, which even the USN can't find during exercises and their ASW capability is far greater than France's. And the Aircraft Carrier is of no use in a conflict in which land based aircraft can fly over enemy territory, it gives no tactical advantage and in a conflict between France and Great Britain. In fact the amount of effort the French would have to put into protecting the Charles De Gaulle would be counter-productive and a major waste of their resources.

Would this be your most advanced sub in the world???

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/15/hms-astute-submarine-slow-leaky-rusty


O ....... by the way the US navy wont have to look to far... does Skye ring any bells??

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1322817/Royal-Navy-shame-nuclear-submarine-HMS-Astute-left-high-dry-Scottish-coast.html

Apparently they need a weeks notice to look out the periscope.

[Kalumba]

Would this be your most advanced sub n the world???

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/15/hms-astute-submarine-slow-leaky-rusty


O ....... by the way the US navy wont have to look to far... does Skye ring any bells??

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1322817/Royal-Navy-shame-nuclear-submarine-HMS-Astute-left-high-dry-Scottish-coast.html

It was your miserable coastline jealous of our subs beauty that caused it to run aground, and we rescued it before you treacherous wreckers could steal anything from it. And every new vessel has teething problems, they have been sorted out and the Astute is now fully operational and far better than anything else at sea.

[SaorAlba]

Would this be your most advanced sub n the world???

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/15/hms-astute-submarine-slow-leaky-rusty


O ....... by the way the US navy wont have to look to far... does Skye ring any bells??

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1322817/Royal-Navy-shame-nuclear-submarine-HMS-Astute-left-high-dry-Scottish-coast.html

It was your miserable coastline jealous of our subs beauty that caused it to run aground, and we rescued it before you treacherous wreckers could steal anything from it. And every new vessel has teething problems, they have been sorted out and the Astute is now fully operational and far better than anything else at sea.

Well oor miserable coastline would be where your heaps of scrap would be based sunshine, with weapons of mass destruction 30 miles from our largest city.

however you would be more than welcome to park them in the Thames estuary.

[Kalumba]

Well oor miserable coastline would be where your heaps of scrap would be based sunshine, with weapons of mass destruction 30 miles from our largest city.

however you would be more than welcome to park them in the Thames estuary.

Nah, we'll keep them where nobody will think to look or waste firing a nuclear missile

[Harold I]

2014: France goes to war against the United Kingdom; each side thinks the other side has started the war.

Who would win in this hypothetical scenario? Rules.

1. No nuclear weapons are allowed.

2. No other country may directly participate in this war on either side. No matter what happens, no other country may intervene in this war.

3. No other country may send any type of aid: material, monetary, or manpower-wise to either side no matter how many of their citizens may die in this war (for example, the United States is NOT allowed to intervene on the side of the UK even if a French bombing raid over London kills a dozen US citizens).

4. The war only ends ONLY WHEN one side formally surrenders and signs a paper saying they surrender and give massive concessions. Assume that any results to settle this war otherwise will inevitably fail; no negotiations can be reached for a mutually beneficial exit and if any such negotiations are reached, they are very soon violated and the war resumes. This is a fight to the death...

5. The UK and France are not allowed to take the war to other countries. They may not invade other countries in this war; they are not allowed to operate in the territorial waters of other countries or use the airspace of other countries. They may not operate military units in other countries or hide military units/supply bases in other countries. HOWEVER, they are allowed to target, destroy or capture ANYTHING that operates in international waters, outer space, unclaimed territory and within French or British airspace, seaspace, and land sovereignty + contested Anglo-French territories IF they are capable of doing so. They are allowed to kill, maim, injure, torture, rob or otherwise maltreat citizens of foreign nations in the above listed types of territories (''... international waters and within French or British airspace, seaspace...'').

6. Each side is given ONE WHOLE YEAR starting from now to position their forces for this war. They know not that the war will break out exactly one year from now but they are expecting that a war between the two countries IS coming in the near future.

7. Military spending and military composition does not change between now and the time scheduled for the war to start. The world economy does not change dramatically from now and the time the war is scheduled to start. The respective populations of both countries does not change dramatically from now and the time the war is scheduled to start. Neither France nor Great Britain will partake in any other military conflicts from now until the start of the war (assume that France pulls out of Mali right now instantly and without a cost).

8. Other rules are subject to be posted by future OP edits.

This is France vs United Kingdom... based on 2013 stats and each side is given one year to prepare... A total war just between these two until one side wins. Who will win?

Vive la France? Or God Bless the Queen?

My vote goes to France. Slightly more people, slightly more powerful economically, less vulnerable to disruptions in sea trade.

<sidenote> God Save the Queen

But seriously, the British have always descriminated the french, but I have faith in my homeland! God save the queen

[Riparian March]

The UK wins hands down. Here is why. Gibraltar, Ghurkhas, and Ghandi.

[SaorAlba]

2014: France goes to war against the United Kingdom; each side thinks the other side has started the war.

Who would win in this hypothetical scenario? Rules.

1. No nuclear weapons are allowed.

2. No other country may directly participate in this war on either side. No matter what happens, no other country may intervene in this war.

3. No other country may send any type of aid: material, monetary, or manpower-wise to either side no matter how many of their citizens may die in this war (for example, the United States is NOT allowed to intervene on the side of the UK even if a French bombing raid over London kills a dozen US citizens).

4. The war only ends ONLY WHEN one side formally surrenders and signs a paper saying they surrender and give massive concessions. Assume that any results to settle this war otherwise will inevitably fail; no negotiations can be reached for a mutually beneficial exit and if any such negotiations are reached, they are very soon violated and the war resumes. This is a fight to the death...

5. The UK and France are not allowed to take the war to other countries. They may not invade other countries in this war; they are not allowed to operate in the territorial waters of other countries or use the airspace of other countries. They may not operate military units in other countries or hide military units/supply bases in other countries. HOWEVER, they are allowed to target, destroy or capture ANYTHING that operates in international waters, outer space, unclaimed territory and within French or British airspace, seaspace, and land sovereignty + contested Anglo-French territories IF they are capable of doing so. They are allowed to kill, maim, injure, torture, rob or otherwise maltreat citizens of foreign nations in the above listed types of territories (''... international waters and within French or British airspace, seaspace...'').

6. Each side is given ONE WHOLE YEAR starting from now to position their forces for this war. They know not that the war will break out exactly one year from now but they are expecting that a war between the two countries IS coming in the near future.

7. Military spending and military composition does not change between now and the time scheduled for the war to start. The world economy does not change dramatically from now and the time the war is scheduled to start. The respective populations of both countries does not change dramatically from now and the time the war is scheduled to start. Neither France nor Great Britain will partake in any other military conflicts from now until the start of the war (assume that France pulls out of Mali right now instantly and without a cost).

8. Other rules are subject to be posted by future OP edits.

This is France vs United Kingdom... based on 2013 stats and each side is given one year to prepare... A total war just between these two until one side wins. Who will win?

Vive la France? Or God Bless the Queen?

My vote goes to France. Slightly more people, slightly more powerful economically, less vulnerable to disruptions in sea trade.

<sidenote> God Save the Queen

But seriously, the British have always descriminated the french, but I have faith in my homeland! God save the queen

Considering that until 1906 under the terms of the Auld alliance all Scots where granted dual nationality with France. I think I know who i'll be supporting.

Vive la Republique ......... vive la liberte.

VIVE I' ECOSSE, ALLIEZ FRANCE, VIVE LE VIELLE ALLIANCE.

[Third Imperial France]

Yeah. I guess I'm a bit biased.

[SaorAlba]

The UK wins hands down. Here is why. Gibraltar, Ghurkhas, and Ghandi.

Ghandi ??????????? methinks one should check ones history?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi

[Consortium of Manchukuo]

My favorite singer is from France. Defeat is not an option.

I think another thing that may be interesting is the French economic structure. Traditionally, since the end of the second world war that is, France has incorporated a lot more state economic intervention (Dirigisme) than other western nations. Whether this is as effective in peace time is of course, up to debate, but it might give the French a lot more capability to rapidly and effectively utilize the economic tools they've built up to switch their economy to a war-time footing, and do so in a lot more efficient manner than the UK could. Thus, if they have a year to prepare they might be better able to effectively utilize this time to start re-organizing and preparing their military forces for war.

I also like France's Mistral class assault ships more than the British ones, though they're a bit light on active weapons.

[Arglorand]

The UK wins hands down. Here is why. Gibraltar, Ghurkhas, and Ghandi.

The man who ended the British Empire without firing a single shot is not a reason why the UK would win.

[Riparian March]

The UK wins hands down. Here is why. Gibraltar, Ghurkhas, and Ghandi.

Ghandi ??????????? methinks one should check ones history?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi

What is your point? I misspelled his name?

[Heavenly Peace]

Neither. England is where my heart belongs, not the UK.

[SaorAlba]

Ghandi ??????????? methinks one should check ones history?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi

What is your point? I misspelled his name?

this would be my point..........................

The UK wins hands down. Here is why. Gibraltar, Ghurkhas, and Ghandi.

The man who ended the British Empire without firing a single shot is not a reason why the UK would win.

Doh!!!!!!

[SaorAlba]

Well oor miserable coastline would be where your heaps of scrap would be based sunshine, with weapons of mass destruction 30 miles from our largest city.

however you would be more than welcome to park them in the Thames estuary.

Nah, we'll keep them where nobody will think to look or waste firing a nuclear missile

Good cos that'll gie us a chance tae sabotage them fur oor French allies .........

shouldnt be too hard jist delete the sandbank at Skye fae the sat nav.

[Arglorand]

Nah, we'll keep them where nobody will think to look or waste firing a nuclear missile

Good cos that'll gie us a chance tae sabotage them fur oor French allies .........

shouldnt be too hard jist delete the sandbank at Skye fae the sat nav.

Just sell them on eBay. That always works.

[Riparian March]

The UK wins hands down. Here is why. Gibraltar, Ghurkhas, and Ghandi.

The man who ended the British Empire without firing a single shot is not a reason why the UK would win.

Sure, Gandhi played a key role in the end of the Empire, but he didn't do it by himself. However, his legacy (no resurrection or time travel is involved) Will give the Brits the needed edge.

[SaorAlba]

Good cos that'll gie us a chance tae sabotage them fur oor French allies .........

shouldnt be too hard jist delete the sandbank at Skye fae the sat nav.

Just sell them on eBay. That always works.

We've already tried that!!!

http://nationalcollective.com/2012/11/20/trident-nuclear-submarine-fleet-for-sale/

I didnae go down to well with ebay!! lol

[Arglorand]

The man who ended the British Empire without firing a single shot is not a reason why the UK would win.

Sure, Gandhi played a key role in the end of the Empire, but he didn't do it by himself. However, his legacy (no resurrection or time travel is involved) Will give the Brits the needed edge.

"The guy who defeated us using nothing but the will of his people will inspire us to victory!"

[Arglorand]

Just sell them on eBay. That always works.

We've already tried that!!!

http://nationalcollective.com/2012/11/20/trident-nuclear-submarine-fleet-for-sale/

I didnae go down to well with ebay!! lol

Ah, National Collective, brilliant as always.

[Riparian March]

Sure, Gandhi played a key role in the end of the Empire, but he didn't do it by himself. However, his legacy (no resurrection or time travel is involved) Will give the Brits the needed edge.

"The guy who defeated us using nothing but the will of his people will inspire us to victory!"

Okay, who needs a history lesson now. Gandhi did not achieve independence by himself. Seriously, there was a bunch of other Indian independence groups, many of them ok with violence. What Gandhi did that was unique was promote non-violence and unity, because for him neither the British nor the Muslims were enemies. The experince is different than how France departed from its colonies. Each nation learned different lessons, because they had different experiences. This will effect how they behave in the war.

[The UK in Exile]

Probably a Scottish regiment.

(of course; given the location and time period, they were most likely East India Co Sepoys.)

Sepoys, eh? I'm guessing otherwise.

Apparently getting totally drunk was standard behavior for British colonial garrisons...

[Governor] De Bouillé carefully maintained a facade of peace in his dealings with [local British] authorities while he began preparing his forces on Martinique. On 2 September he and Lieutenant Governor Stuart signed an agreement that formally prohibited privateering crews to plunder. The next day de Bouillé sent one of his officers to Dominica to see whether a Royal Navy frigate was still anchored in Prince Rupert's Bay (near present-day Portsmouth). Stuart, suspicious of the man, had him questioned and then released. On 5 September de Bouillé was informed that the frigate had sailed for Barbados. He immediately moved to launch his invasion. Some Frenchmen (some British sources suggest they were French soldiers infiltrated onto the island) gained entry to the battery at Cachacrou that evening, plied its garrison with drink, and poured sand into the touchholes of the fort's cannons, temporarily rendering them useless. De Bouillé had in fact infiltrated some agents onto the island who had convinced some of the local French-speaking militia to abandon their duties when called up.

After sunset on 6 September, 1,800 French troops and 1,000 volunteers departed Martinique aboard the frigates Tourterelle, Diligente, and Amphitrite, the corvette Étourdie, and a flotilla of smaller vessels. (Sources describing the action give significantly varying numbers for the size of the French force. The numbers here are from de Bouillé's report of the action; some British sources claim his force numbered as much as 4,500.) The first point of attack was the battery at Cachacrou, where the British garrison, befuddled by drink and with inoperative cannons, was overcome without significant resistance around dawn on 7 September. Two of the 48th Regiment's soldiers were driven over the ramparts and fell to their deaths. After securing the battery the French fired cannons and sent signal rockets skyward to signal their allies. These actions also alerted Lieutenant Governor Stuart at Roseau, and the alarm was immediately raised. Many of the French Dominican militia failed to muster, as arranged. About 100 militia ended up mustering for duty, and were deployed among Roseau's defences.

The French proceeded to land more troops between Cachacrou and Roseau, with the objective of gaining the high ground above the capital. The main force of 1,400 men was landed about 2 miles (3.2 km) south of Roseau near Pointe Michel, with heavy fire from the hill batteries resulting in 40 casualties. De Bouillé landed with another 600 at Loubiere, between Pointe Michel and Roseau, while another 500 landed north of Roseau, and the fleet's frigates moved to bombard Roseau's defences. The French briefly captured the coastal fort at Loubiere, but were three times driven out by fire from above. They ended up withdrawing until forces were able to reach and capture the hill batteries. By noon, the French occupied the high ground above the capital, and Lieutenant Governor Stuart realised the situation was hopeless.

Negotiations followed, and Stuart and de Bouillé signed the terms of capitulation at about 3:00 pm. The proceedings were interrupted by one of the French frigates, whose captain, apparently unaware of the proceedings, fired on Fort Young, where the British flag was still flying. The two commanders rushed to the fort to prevent further exchanges of gunfire before they completed the agreement. The French then formally took control of Roseau. The British regulars were made prisoners of war, and the militia were released to return home. De Bouillé, who was interested in keeping on good terms with the population, did not allow his troops to plunder the town. Instead, he levied a fee of £4,400 on the island's population that was distributed among his men.

— Wikipedia Article on the "Invasion of Dominica" (1778)

AFAIK, there weren't many Sepoys — or Scotsmen, for that matter — living in Norfolk (home of the 45th Regiment) back in the 18th Century.

well drinking the water was a death sentence.....