France vs United Kingdom

[Kalumba]

"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.

Except we Brits carried out one of the most brutal wars of decolonisation in Kenya, which was almost as bad a the French behaviour in Algeria. Gandhi's legacy will in no way give us an edge in a war, if anything it would promote a non-violent attempt to end the war with France, i.e. a surrender. The men we need to look to are the Nelsons and Fishers, the Wellingtons and Montgomerys who fought for this nation not against it.

[The UK in Exile]

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.

Except we Brits carried out one of the most brutal wars of decolonisation in Kenya, which was almost as bad a the French behaviour in Algeria. Gandhi's legacy will in no way give us an edge in a war, if anything it would promote a non-violent attempt to end the war with France, i.e. a surrender. The men we need to look to are the Nelsons and Fishers, the Wellingtons and Montgomerys who fought for this nation not against it.

if you want to learn, learn from the people who beat you.

[Arglorand]

Except we Brits carried out one of the most brutal wars of decolonisation in Kenya, which was almost as bad a the French behaviour in Algeria. Gandhi's legacy will in no way give us an edge in a war, if anything it would promote a non-violent attempt to end the war with France, i.e. a surrender. The men we need to look to are the Nelsons and Fishers, the Wellingtons and Montgomerys who fought for this nation not against it.

if you want to learn, learn from the people who beat you.

This, however, is something I'd support. I dunno about all of you, but I'd support the side who went, "No, despite you declaring war on us, we will NOT take up arms!"

But then again, my moral support means, uh, nothing.

[Thrice Crownlands]

Except we Brits carried out one of the most brutal wars of decolonisation in Kenya, which was almost as bad a the French behaviour in Algeria. Gandhi's legacy will in no way give us an edge in a war, if anything it would promote a non-violent attempt to end the war with France, i.e. a surrender. The men we need to look to are the Nelsons and Fishers, the Wellingtons and Montgomerys who fought for this nation not against it.

if you want to learn, learn from the people who beat you.

... Gandhi diden't beat Britain; Britain was just too exhausted and broke to put up a fight. Its easy to win without fighting when your opponent is in no shape to fight. This scenario, however, does not have that sort of enemy.

[Kalumba]

if you want to learn, learn from the people who beat you.

But the last people who beat us in a war of the sort this scenario is talking of were the Normans back in 1066, not many relavent lessons there And Gandhi didn't beat us, it was the combined will of the Indian people backed by Nehru and Jinnah to an equal level as Gandhi.

[The UK in Exile]

if you want to learn, learn from the people who beat you.

But the last people who beat us in a war of the sort this scenario is talking of were the Normans back in 1066, not many relavent lessons there And Gandhi didn't beat us, it was the combined will of the Indian people backed by Nehru and Jinnah to an equal level as Gandhi.

then one important lesson is that Right makes Might.

[Kalumba]

But the last people who beat us in a war of the sort this scenario is talking of were the Normans back in 1066, not many relavent lessons there And Gandhi didn't beat us, it was the combined will of the Indian people backed by Nehru and Jinnah to an equal level as Gandhi.

then one important lesson is that Right makes Might.

And what use is that in a war against the French? Gandhi's lessons are important but of no relevance to a war between Britain and France, neither of us would be right.

[The UK in Exile]

then one important lesson is that Right makes Might.

And what use is that in a war against the French? Gandhi's lessons are important but of no relevance to a war between Britain and France, neither of us would be right.

that adopting the moral high ground, seeking to minimize casulaties and avoiding action would build international support for ending the war quickly and on terms fair to the british far more effectively than actually fighting the war.

[Arglorand]

And what use is that in a war against the French? Gandhi's lessons are important but of no relevance to a war between Britain and France, neither of us would be right.

that adopting the moral high ground, seeking to minimize casulaties and avoiding action would build international support for ending the war quickly and on terms fair to the british far more effectively than actually fighting the war.

Except international support would not help against whatever circumstances prompted the French to do something as stupid as invade Britain.

[Kalumba]

And what use is that in a war against the French? Gandhi's lessons are important but of no relevance to a war between Britain and France, neither of us would be right.

that adopting the moral high ground, seeking to minimize casulaties and avoiding action would build international support for ending the war quickly and on terms fair to the british far more effectively than actually fighting the war.

Aye, but the frankly silly OP has this a simply a military conflict between the two nations with nobody else allowed to get involved. And being British we already have the moral high ground with the old saving europe from itself hundreds of times. Honest.

[The UK in Exile]

that adopting the moral high ground, seeking to minimize casulaties and avoiding action would build international support for ending the war quickly and on terms fair to the british far more effectively than actually fighting the war.

Except international support would not help against whatever circumstances prompted the French to do something as stupid as invade Britain.

it would because the real world is not like modern warfare 2 and nations don't just randomly appear dropping para-troopers all over your country, theres a context to a conflict. international support is useful in the build up to conflict.

[Arglorand]

Except international support would not help against whatever circumstances prompted the French to do something as stupid as invade Britain.

it would because the real world is not like modern warfare 2 and nations don't just randomly appear dropping para-troopers all over your country, theres a context to a conflict. international support is useful in the build up to conflict.

The real world is indeed not like modern warfare 2, therefore this conflict would never actually happen.

Something so silly as a French-British War in the modern day would have to involve some crazy fascist dictatorship somehow springing to power in one of the two. In which case, the one who acquired such a dictatorship would lose, because all these unfriendly, democratic nations around won't just sit and wait for this dictatorship to invade everything.

[Mkuki]

Germany? As soon as London falls to Hollande I think it is pretty clear that the Germans will "intervene with force" by "liberating" the French people from the boot of Socialism through "aggressive propaganda".


But on a more serious note, who has the better and larger Air Force? Are British jets superior to French Jets? Does the RN even have aircraft carriers? I know France has the de Gaulle. All in all the armies mean little until, like in World War II, the air is won.

Anyway, my vote goes with France. Long live the Revolution!

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

France has less people than the UK by a couple million or so.

[SaorAlba]

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.....

But it wasnt Scots or sepoys getting so pissed they where incapable of defending their post was it?!

[The UK in Exile]

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

But it wasnt Scots or sepoys getting so pissed they where incapable of defending their post was it?!

quite possibly, I couldn't find any data for the 48th (or the 45th, per ASB), but the 46th, serving in Dominica in 1810, was 25% scots. other units hover around 7-8%. odds are one or two scots were in the garrison.

[SaorAlba]

But it wasnt Scots or sepoys getting so pissed they where incapable of defending their post was it?!

quite possibly, I couldn't find any data for the 48th (or the 45th, per ASB), but the 46th, serving in Dominica in 1810, was 25% scots. other units hover around 7-8%. odds are one or two scots were in the garrison.

So if & it's a big IF there where a couple of Scots they managed to restrain the rest of their colleagues & force feed them alcohol then?

[The UK in Exile]

quite possibly, I couldn't find any data for the 48th (or the 45th, per ASB), but the 46th, serving in Dominica in 1810, was 25% scots. other units hover around 7-8%. odds are one or two scots were in the garrison.

So if & it's a big IF there where a couple of Scots they managed to restrain the rest of their colleagues & force feed them alcohol then?

your point? i'm not sure I ever suggested at any point, that "Which ethnicity was responsible for the fall of dominica in 1778?" was anything but an amusing diversion into history.

[SaorAlba]

So if & it's a big IF there where a couple of Scots they managed to restrain the rest of their colleagues & force feed them alcohol then?

your point? i'm not sure I ever suggested at any point, that "Which ethnicity was responsible for the fall of dominica in 1778?" was anything but an amusing diversion into history.

Well with this statement earlier it would seem otherwise.

Probably a Scottish regiment.

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

[The UK in Exile]

your point? i'm not sure I ever suggested at any point, that "Which ethnicity was responsible for the fall of dominica in 1778?" was anything but an amusing diversion into history.

Well with this statement earlier it would seem otherwise.

Probably a Scottish regiment.

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

Its a joke. You can tell its a joke, because of the little smiley face with the tongue sticking out.

[SaorAlba]

Well with this statement earlier it would seem otherwise.

Its a joke. You can tell its a joke, because of the little smiley face with the tongue sticking out.

Am I laffin??? naw. ...................

[Priory Academy USSR]

Its a joke. You can tell its a joke, because of the little smiley face with the tongue sticking out.

Am I laffin??? naw. ...................

I am.

[Thronegaria]

Argentina would join the fight and take the Malvinas / Falklands

[SaorAlba]

Argentina would join the fight and take the Malvinas / Falklands

You mean liberate the malvinas ??


Anyhoo they cannae join in it's no allowed. nae other countries are allowed tae take part would be interesting tae see who sides wi who though.

[Convoluted Reflection]

How about Britan supported by the US and France supported by the EU?
Or is that against the rules?
What about Britans Commonwealth?

[SaorAlba]

How about Britan supported by the US and France supported by the EU?
Or is that against the rules?
What about Britans Commonwealth?

Soooo what makes you think the US would support britian in this??

France came to Americas aid in the war of independence for starters

In the war against Argentina, America didnt aid britian.