US Foreign Legion?

frostfire · 02-18-2005, 18:45

In relation to the following threads:
http://professionalsoldiers.com/foru...foreign+legion
http://professionalsoldiers.com/foru...foreign+legion

Gentlemen (and ladies), the concept is familiar and it has been done before.
The question: how relevant is the concept in today's world conflict?

Some various articles to start with:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0...oreign,00.html
http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/St...x?StoryId=3601
http://techcentralstation.com/092503B.html
http://www.flipsidepress.com/getpost...umb=1092168523
http://www.enterstageright.com/archi...03/0203afl.htm
there's another article I first read 2 years ago mentioning the US version of FFL would reduce soccer moms & nagging wives raising hell on DOD everytime their boys get hurt in training/deployment. I couldn't find it again. Could you please post it if you happen to know it.

rubberneck · 02-18-2005, 20:42

One of the last acts of the Roman Empire was to employ forgien fighters inplace of Roman citizens. It didn't have a very happy ending for them. As the old saying goes... "those who forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes".

QRQ 30 · 02-18-2005, 22:11

A little further research will show that the concept is still alive and working.. The last large numbers were from the Lodge Act in Europe. I believe many former Soviet troops have now been assimulated. Assimulation rather than something like the Polish Brigade in the sixties may be better. Foreign nationals who serve in combat with our Armed Forced are offered citizenship.

As for the soccer moms -- too bad. That is what the all volunteer military is all about. They have no complaints.

frostfire · 02-18-2005, 22:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubberneck

One of the last acts of the Roman Empire was to employ forgien fighters inplace of Roman citizens. It didn't have a very happy ending for them. As the old saying goes... "those who forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes".

in your POV, FFL is a failure, then?
or do you view them the same way as "French"???

**The Reaper** · 02-18-2005, 23:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by frostfire

in your POV, FFL is a failure, then?
or do you view them the same way as "French"???

What is France's role in the world today and what does the FFL do to assist with that in the post-colonial period?

How does that compare to the U.S.'s global role and missions?

We have done similar things here before with SF and the Lodge Act.

TR

QRQ 30 · 02-18-2005, 23:29

I'm not the scholarly type, but to me the FFL was the exact opposite of our Foreign Brigades and SF. They werer used to manitain French rule over the colonies. Indo-China is a prime example. Rather than "De Opresso Liber" the FFL attempted to maintain French rule while the French bled Indochina of it's resources. Sometimes I think we aided the wrong people but of course France was our "Ally" in Korea and we didn't want to lose their support. (tongue in cheek) (guffaw) (gasp).

**The Reaper** · 02-18-2005, 23:35

Terry:

Think broadly, do not limit your perspective to a single war with SF involvement.

With FID, we have helped prop up a lot of governments over the past 50 years, some good and some bad. Some got better because we were there.

We have liberated some too, with UW.

Also consider the FFL in Algeria, and their role in that mess.

TR

QRQ 30 · 02-18-2005, 23:48

I guess I failed to make myself clear. We support freedom while the FFL supported French Colonialism. I think.

Either way, the concept of using foreign troops isn't foreign to us. The "DPs" (not a derogatory term) in the early 10th SFGA were the real backbone of that group.

As for Indo-China I think we could have stopped communism at the Chinese Border instead of the Mekong River. This is pure unsupported conjecture but I think we may have had a strong anti-Chinese ally in Ho Chi Minh. Vietnamese and Chinese don't mix well. Note that the fear of Chinese occupying Vietnam never occurred.

One thing about conjecture vs. history is that we will never know.

rubberneck · 02-19-2005, 08:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by frostfire

in your POV, FFL is a failure, then?
or do you view them the same way as "French"???

I have no dobut that the FFL are a very effective fighting force. I have no first hand experience with them but every thing I have heard here and else leads me to that conclusion. My comments weren't about the FFL but the way they are used by the French. Seems to me that they are used in every god awful place that the French government, for political reasons, won't send French citizens to fight. If the cause isn't worth losing actual French troops then maybe they ought to reconsider if they ought to be there in the first place.

When our government doesn't want to commit large numbers of US troops to fight overseas they don't send forgieners in our stead they send the men that so graciously allow us to post here.

As far as the Romans go once you lose the pain of losing fellow citizens in war you become desensatized to the world around you. Elected officials begin to make foolish and stupid decisions because there isn't any domestic ramifications.

**Airbornelawyer** · 02-21-2005, 19:45

As of April 2003, there were approximately 66,000 foreign-born soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines in the US armed forces. This included non-citizens and naturalized citizens. The largest single group was Filipinos, but many other nationalities were represented, ranging from El Salvadorans to Mexicans to Canadians to even French (Capt. Patrick Rapicault, USMC, KIA in Ramadi on November 15, 2004, was born in Martinique, a French possession, and grew up in southern France. He became a US citizen in 1995 while in the Marine Corps Reserve and was commissioned in 1997.).

We already have a foreign legion, but one that is consistent with American values as an immigrant society where anyone may become an American no matter where he or she was born. Legionnaires earn French citizenship after a 5-year hitch, but that does not really make them French.

frostfire · 02-22-2005, 05:09

I guess I'm bogged down over procedural specifics. To join FFL, any foreigners can surrender their passport (their foreign citizenships) and try out the selection process, whereas to join the US military, one has to be at least a permanent resident (non-citizen) status first. In a way, this procedure in US is not so much "foreign." Technically, the Lodge Act resemble FFL concept more than the current foreign born military members.

But I do agree with the way you put it:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airbornelawyer

We already have a foreign legion, but one that is consistent with American values as an immigrant society where anyone may become an American no matter where he or she was born. Legionnaires earn French citizenship after a 5-year hitch, but that does not really make them French.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

What is France's role in the world today and what does the FFL do to assist with that in the post-colonial period?
How does that compare to the U.S.'s global role and missions?
We have done similar things here before with SF and the Lodge Act.
Also consider the FFL in Algeria, and their role in that mess.

Reaper Sir,
am I fug**d if I can't exactly decipher your stance/input from these questions?
I think you and QRQ 30 are alligned in your view of the FFL. I'd assume you meant they're just like French in their neo-colonialism campaign, which is opposite of the US (esp. SF) global role, but nevertheless, you agree with the concept implementation as it had been done before with the Lodge Act. Back then it was the Soviet expatriots. So for the current world situation, the newly trained Iraqi (or other Arabic/moslem countries) troops?