French nukes during Vietnam War

France got their nukes in 1960. Would it be possible to move this up so France has a nuke or two available during Vietnam war (their own war, that is). for a period after WW" french nuclear program was suspended due to lack of finances and instability. I guess finances problem is hard to get around, but french troops could get their hands on some German research. Or simply boost it from US.

If they do have, do they use it around DBP?
 
take french proud and the danger of loosing indochina and there you go...

Plus, atomic bombing wasn't so demonised in the fifties since many people didn't know about radiation etc.

I think it was Adenauer who spoke of A-weapons as "modern artillery".
So the french would nuke hanoi and thereby win the war.....even though that would contradict to the first rule of asian warfare :

"we can always beat the french"

(also the first rule of german, british, russian and muslim warfare)
 
What about Tours?

...Or the last part of the Hundred Years War?

Also, with the exception of Russian warfare... What about the Napoleonic Wars? :p

As for the actual topic, does a nuclear attack necessarily lead to total victory? As I understood it, the Viet Cong's strength lay in their decentralized nature anyway, with cells in every village and the popular support of the people. Of course losing Hanoi is a huge blow, but it's still not clear to me that the French Army would have the willingness to fight it out there, especially so soon after World War II.

In fact, if America sees a nuclear attack being ineffective, this P.O.D. might lead to an even earlier Communist victory.
 
napoleonic wars were lost in the end and napoleon wasn't even french...

the hundred years war was won according to the first rule of FRENCH warfare: "French armies only win when not led by a frenchman" (Joan of Arc --> shizophrenic french wannbe messiah)

have you guys ever read the "short history of french warfare"? fucking hilarious....
 

Hendryk

Banned
have you guys ever read the "short history of french warfare"? fucking hilarious....
If you're going to make this kind of comments, you may soon overstay your welcome on this board. Do refrain from endorsing that kind of slander, which in any case was the byproduct of a deliberate smear campaign by the Bush administration and its supporters.

Oh, and Joan of Arc was as French as they come. And if Napoleon wasn't French, then Stalin, an ethnic Georgian, wasn't Russian.
 
I don't care for which political reasons or whatsoever it was made up as long as it's funny.

and I didn't claim that joan of arc wasn't french, she just wasn't a frenchMAN.

and yes, stalin wasn't russian. he was an ethnic georgian who came to be the leader of a state that included several people, the russian being the dominating one.
 
France got their nukes in 1960. Would it be possible to move this up so France has a nuke or two available during Vietnam war

to late !
the French Vietnam war was from 1946 to 1954
who end in french defeat in The Battle of Dien Bien Phu

however
The French government demanded from US government help in form of 2 Atombomb !
of curse they refuse that demand

France start 1957 with on Atombomb program with first test "Gerboise Bleue" February 13, 1960

wat about the use of French atombomb in the Algerian war !?

like Algiers putsch of april 1961, were failed coup d'état attempt organized by four French army head
wat if wen they get the french Atombombs in there hands ?

there is this rumor that Gerboise Verte A-bomb was used not as a test.
but to destroy it, prevent the military junta to get it!
 
...Or the last part of the Hundred Years War?

Also, with the exception of Russian warfare... What about the Napoleonic Wars? :p

As for the actual topic, does a nuclear attack necessarily lead to total victory? As I understood it, the Viet Cong's strength lay in their decentralized nature anyway, with cells in every village and the popular support of the people. Of course losing Hanoi is a huge blow, but it's still not clear to me that the French Army would have the willingness to fight it out there, especially so soon after World War II.

In fact, if America sees a nuclear attack being ineffective, this P.O.D. might lead to an even earlier Communist victory.

If they are able and willing to drop one or two they are able and willing to drop a dozen. Sooner or later the Vietnamese give up before the French kill them all.
 
If you're going to make this kind of comments, you may soon overstay your welcome on this board. Do refrain from endorsing that kind of slander, which in any case was the byproduct of a deliberate smear campaign by the Bush administration and its supporters.

Relax, it was a joke.
 
France got their nukes in 1960. Would it be possible to move this up so France has a nuke or two available during Vietnam war (their own war, that is). for a period after WW" french nuclear program was suspended due to lack of finances and instability. I guess finances problem is hard to get around, but french troops could get their hands on some German research. Or simply boost it from US.

If they do have, do they use it around DBP?

I doubt they could get it so soon after being devastated by the Second World War, both in infrastructure-industrial capacity and in political stability. Also, I doubt the US would prop them up with blueprints for developing nuclear weapons when they could just as easily provide the means of delivery to targets themselves - and didn't.

So the french would nuke hanoi and thereby win the war.....

Why would the French destroy their own city?

even though that would contradict to the first rule of asian warfare :

"we can always beat the french"

(also the first rule of german, british, russian and muslim warfare)

That's just too exceptionally asinine a saying to give a proper response to.

napoleonic wars were lost in the end and napoleon wasn't even french...

Napoleon Bonaparte lost the last three Napoloenic wars; most of the other wars he won with some of the most impressive victories in human record.

And while Bonaparte was born into a Corsican family after its annexation by France, he was still French-educated and well-versed in French military traditions and norms. His genelogical record has nothing to do with anything when it comes to how great he was on the battlefield - he made France the grandest power on Europe for over a decade. That is what matters.

the hundred years war was won according to the first rule of FRENCH warfare: "French armies only win when not led by a frenchman" (Joan of Arc --> shizophrenic french wannbe messiah)

And she was still French. What's your point?

have you guys ever read the "short history of french warfare"? fucking hilarious....

Yes, I have. And no, it isn't.
 
Oh, and Joan of Arc was as French as they come. And if Napoleon wasn't French, then Stalin, an ethnic Georgian, wasn't Russian.

Stalin wasn't Russian. He was the New Soviet Man.

I wanted to put TM but it didn't feel appropriate.
 
I don't care for which political reasons or whatsoever it was made up as long as it's funny.

and I didn't claim that joan of arc wasn't french, she just wasn't a frenchMAN.

and yes, stalin wasn't russian. he was an ethnic georgian who came to be the leader of a state that included several people, the russian being the dominating one.

You never heard of Verdun? Or Austerlitz, Jena, Marengo, Borodino and a host of other battles? Or the Alma in the Crimea? Or the operation in Zaire in the 1970s?

Heh. Are you a Merkin? If so, it's ironic you write of the French military failures in a thread about Vietnam.
 
Why would the French destroy their own city?


Exactly. Wasn't the whole point of the Indochine War that the French thought of it as integral parts of the French nation?
Anyway, that was certainly the case with Algeria, and therefore I have to say the would never drop a bomb there. Especially since all the population centers contained substantial numbers of long-term white French residents.
 
Exactly. Wasn't the whole point of the Indochine War that the French thought of it as integral parts of the French nation?
Anyway, that was certainly the case with Algeria, and therefore I have to say the would never drop a bomb there. Especially since all the population centers contained substantial numbers of long-term white French residents.

Well that and IIRC Hanoi was in French hands throughout the First Indochina War.
 
I'm wondering what the reaction of the USSR and PRC might be if the French or US used nukes. The USA had the upper hand in terms of nuclear delivery then right?,

This might sound a bit noobish, but might not China and the Soviets think about invading Vietnam to aid the Communist insurgents...... Assuming the insurgency is still taking place.
 
Last edited:

~The Doctor~

Assuming France can get the bomb this early, why would they waste it in Indochina? I'd be saving it for the Soviets just a few hundred miles away, rather than a colony on the other side of the world...
 
I can't really see how a nuclear bomb really alters things.
Its like going after a virus with a sledgehammer.
 
Top