It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


I just don't get this whole French and retreat thing.

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 02:32 AM
I'll explain this to you the best of my drunken ability. I don't really get why everyone assosciates France with everything bad militarly. I don't get it! Maybe France isn't up to par with other nations in warfare, but I don't think that it deserves all the retreat and surrender jokes! France had a key part in freeing America as a country, they did have one of the most powerful militarys in the world for many many years, and they have Napoleon!

Yes, they have been defeated before numerous times, but I still don't think they are bad. The French foreign legion is full of die hard crazy mo' fo's who should pretty much bleed French pastries they are so patriotic! Granted they were invaded in WW2 without much of a fight. They were facing a complete new kind of warfare though against one of the most powerful, most technoligically advanced armys in it's time. Blitzkreig warfare was a complete new concept.

The French undergroudn movement did SO much for the allied victory. They fought like true patriots for France even though their country was taken over! I'm not a avid French enthusiast, or even thinking about this all the time. I just think the French deserve more military credit. They were a key figure in the independence of America as well. They did really good int the early pre-American part of Vietnam. Holding back multiple Viet Namh attacks and building a strong defensive line.

Just like any country should, they fough! Why so much put downs? I'm not taking a side. I just don't get it!

posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 03:17 AM
Actually the "battle of France" was much fiercer than most believe, it lasted from 10 may 1940 to 25 June 1940 and the Allied ended up with 360.000 KIA/wounded and 1.900.000 captured, I'm no military expert but I think so many losses in a mere 6 weeks had a strong influence in the decision to surrender.

Besides "surrendering" is still better than being wiped out or captured to work as POW in a camp for the enemy, after all, we needed to save as many people as possible for Hit & Run strikes all over France, you need a lot of people to build an efficient resistance network.

posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 05:42 AM
reply to post by USMC-oorah

Neither the French nor the British anticipated such a rapid defeat in Poland, and the quick German victory, relying on a new form of mobile warfare, disturbed some generals in London and Paris. However, the Allies still expected they would be able to contain the enemy, anticipating a war reasonably like the First World War, so they believed that even without an Eastern Front the Germans could be defeated by blockade, as in the previous conflict. This feeling was more widely shared in London than in Paris, which had suffered more severely during the First World War in blood and material devastation. The French leadership, in particular Edouard Daladier, Prime Minister of France since 1938, also respected the large gap between France's human and economic resources as compared to those of Germany.

On top of all of that , the French government was said to be very opinionated, pompous and very arrogant when they should've been more humble.
Remember who got their a**es handed to them right before we went into Vietnam? You got it, the French!!

It's no secret that France, in today's world, hates America. As the saying goes...France loves American money but hates Americans.

posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 03:46 AM
At least the French had the "guts" to start a revolution....and a bloody good one at that! (bastille day on monday 14th july).

They have the social passion that others can only dream about and that is why they are top of THIS list.

It's all about "having a go"! ...better to try and fail than never to try at all.

"vive la revolution"

top topics

log in