Finally, France finds someone it refuses to surrender to: Lance Armstrong

[albert77]

I just love the title of this thread, maybe one of the best ever. But Albert, come on, the Germans crushed the French in basically four days in May 1940.

Very true, because most of the capable soldiers and politicians they would have had in 1940 were nothing but long-dead ghosts. And, too, the French just didn't have the stomach for another experience like what they went through in 1914-18.

 

[MN Matt]

So their most capable soldiers would have been 45-50 years old? Not all that impressive.

 

[Ashy Larry]

The French: Almost as lame and defenseless as Big 10 football.

And what about those Mexicans......they can sneak into the country by the thousands, but can't take the time to learn to speak English.


As long as we're throwing out stereotypes and all.

 

[verbalkint]

I just love the title of this thread, maybe one of the best ever. But Albert, come on, the Germans crushed the French in basically four days in May 1940.

France's 110,000-plus war dead thank you for your input.

 

[amraeder]

I just love the title of this thread, maybe one of the best ever. But Albert, come on, the Germans crushed the French in basically four days in May 1940.

Very true, because most of the capable soldiers and politicians they would have had in 1940 were nothing but long-dead ghosts. And, too, the French just didn't have the stomach for another experience like what they went through in 1914-18.

That whole Maginot idea didn't work out too well, either, IIRC.

And NM Matt, you could at least make the argument, would have to look at the numbers to make sure it's true, but those 40-50 year olds who were dead would have had kids who would have helped boost the ranks if they lived.

 

[amraeder]

If anyone could find an older-than-1990 population pyramid for France, that might be interesting to look at. I'm hoping for something 1970s or 1960s-ish, something that might have both WWI and WWII generations conceivably in it. I'll keep looking, too... but thought it would be interesting to see.

 

[Ashy Larry]

So, yeah, laugh at the French and their often pompous and defeatist attitudes if you must, but when you do also remember what they as a nation went through in 1914-18. It may make you dial back your ridicule just a bit.

The underground resistance in WWII had a lot of people with major balls in what was largely a futile exercise.

On that front, I recommend the film Army of Shadows. Completely changed my opinion about the French participation in WWII.

My wife's great Aunt played a huge part in starting the Resistance....this her what Wikipedia says about her:

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

 

[albert77]

So their most capable soldiers would have been 45-50 years old? Not all that impressive.

Actually, yes. Those capable soldiers, the ones who actually had some guts and military savvy, would have been the colonels and the generals, the senators and the upper level government officials in 1940. But they were gone and the ones who were left were the supply clerks and low-level bureaucrats who managed to avoid combat in WWI and didn't have a clue in 1940.

 

[Double J]

I'd like to point out that the British, who lost almost as many men in the First World War as did the French, had plenty of competent leadership in 1940-41 when they alone were fending off the Axis.

But I'll also admit that things could have turned out very differently had the Germans taken advantage of their chance to wipe out the retreating Brits at Dunkirk, and had the Luftwaffe been allowed to properly fight the Battle of Britain.

As it is, I'm happy things turned out the way they did.

And, oh yeah - **** the French. ;)

 

[Steak Snabler]

If anyone could find an older-than-1990 population pyramid for France, that might be interesting to look at. I'm hoping for something 1970s or 1960s-ish, something that might have both WWI and WWII generations conceivably in it. I'll keep looking, too... but thought it would be interesting to see.

The lists I've found weren't broken down by demographics, but France's population in 1921 was 2.5 million less than in 1911. It had gotten back up to pre-war levels by the mid-1930s, but no doubt you're right, a generation of what would have been political and military leaders was wiped out.

 

[Dr. Van Nostrand]

I know we as Americans like to take good sport out of making fun of the French and their tendency over the past 70 years or so of appeasing tyranny and caving in the face of aggression.

But if you know a little history, you can understand where a lot of that comes from, and it goes back to the so-called Great War (aka WWI), of which a high percentage of the most serious fighting was done in northern France.

For four long bloody years, the French showed incredible bravery and suffered some truly ghastly losses in defending their country against the Germans. They absolutely refused to surrender, and paid a high price for doing so.

Not only was their land physically scarred and ruined for years from being fought over tooth and nail between armies that numbered in the millions, but most of the best and brightest from a whole generation were lost, and those were the leaders who weren't there in 1940 and in the generations that followed.

So, yeah, laugh at the French and their often pompous and defeatist attitudes if you must, but when you do also remember what they as a nation went through in 1914-18. It may make you dial back your ridicule just a bit.

Not to mention that the United States might not have ever existed without the French lending their Navy, plus money, weapons and ammunition during the Revolutionary War.

Mind you, I have little (if any) love for the French. Just sayin'.

 

[TrooperBari]

I know we as Americans like to take good sport out of making fun of the French and their tendency over the past 70 years or so of appeasing tyranny and caving in the face of aggression.

But if you know a little history, you can understand where a lot of that comes from, and it goes back to the so-called Great War (aka WWI), of which a high percentage of the most serious fighting was done in northern France.

For four long bloody years, the French showed incredible bravery and suffered some truly ghastly losses in defending their country against the Germans. They absolutely refused to surrender, and paid a high price for doing so.

Not only was their land physically scarred and ruined for years from being fought over tooth and nail between armies that numbered in the millions, but most of the best and brightest from a whole generation were lost, and those were the leaders who weren't there in 1940 and in the generations that followed.

So, yeah, laugh at the French and their often pompous and defeatist attitudes if you must, but when you do also remember what they as a nation went through in 1914-18. It may make you dial back your ridicule just a bit.

Not to mention that the United States might not have ever existed without the French lending their Navy, plus money, weapons and ammunition during the Revolutionary War.

This, ad infinitum. The US doesn't exist without France's hatred of England.

 

[Philosopher]

Very true, because most of the capable soldiers and politicians they would have had in 1940 were nothing but long-dead ghosts. And, too, the French just didn't have the stomach for another experience like what they went through in 1914-18.

Actually, to be more specific, the biggest problem is that the French learned the wrong lesson from WWI. It taught them the importance of defensive fortifications and digging in -- that's why they spent so much constructing the Maginot Line. That's an understandable lesson to draw from WWI, where tens of thousands of men just to move 50 yards forward. Technology at that time favored defense.

What the French (and almost everyone else at the time) did not realize is that the technology of warfare had radically changed by the time WWII came around. The rise of the tank and mobile infantry gave a great advantage to the attacker and rendered static fortifications (like the Maginot Line) far less useful. The Germans just went around the Line.

I do agree with your take on the French overall, though. For most of the last 500-600 years, France was the most powerful state in Europe. They were usually the big state beating up on everyone else. Just 100 years or so before WWI, Napoleon nearly conquered all of Europe. A little before that, France's navy and money helped us gain independence.

 

[albert77]

Very true, because most of the capable soldiers and politicians they would have had in 1940 were nothing but long-dead ghosts. And, too, the French just didn't have the stomach for another experience like what they went through in 1914-18.

Actually, to be more specific, the biggest problem is that the French learned the wrong lesson from WWI. It taught them the importance of defensive fortifications and digging in -- that's why they spent so much constructing the Maginot Line. That's an understandable lesson to draw from WWI, where tens of thousands of men just to move 50 yards forward. Technology at that time favored defense.

What the French (and almost everyone else at the time) did not realize is that the technology of warfare had radically changed by the time WWII came around. The rise of the tank and mobile infantry gave a great advantage to the attacker and rendered static fortifications (like the Maginot Line) far less useful. The Germans just went around the Line.

I do agree with your take on the French overall, though. For most of the last 500-600 years, France was the most powerful state in Europe. They were usually the big state beating up on everyone else. Just 100 years or so before WWI, Napoleon nearly conquered all of Europe. A little before that, France's navy and money helped us gain independence.

Also, the Germans did something no one thought they could do, and that's invade France through the Ardennes. The French thought the forest was a natural defense system and didn't bother to extend the Line that far

 

[Armchair_QB]

Very true, because most of the capable soldiers and politicians they would have had in 1940 were nothing but long-dead ghosts. And, too, the French just didn't have the stomach for another experience like what they went through in 1914-18.

Actually, to be more specific, the biggest problem is that the French learned the wrong lesson from WWI. It taught them the importance of defensive fortifications and digging in -- that's why they spent so much constructing the Maginot Line. That's an understandable lesson to draw from WWI, where tens of thousands of men just to move 50 yards forward. Technology at that time favored defense.

What the French (and almost everyone else at the time) did not realize is that the technology of warfare had radically changed by the time WWII came around. The rise of the tank and mobile infantry gave a great advantage to the attacker and rendered static fortifications (like the Maginot Line) far less useful. The Germans just went around the Line.

Which is a classic example of planning for a war you've already fought.

 

[Pilot]

Can anyone do a reasonable job explaining Vichy France?

I've never understood what control Germany had over it. I know the Allies on several occasions flat out fought French forces in WW2 and I've never really understood the reasoning there, either.

 

[Pilot]

As to the "should we laugh at France" topic, come on. Of course they aren't all a bunch of quitters. Napoleon is perhaps the most highly regarded general of all time and everyone knows that.

But it's so damn funny. Like a Helen Keller joke.

 

[Double J]

Can anyone do a reasonable job explaining Vichy France?

I've never understood what control Germany had over it. I know the Allies on several occasions flat out fought French forces in WW2 and I've never really understood the reasoning there, either.

Vichy France was a puppet regime established in the southern half of France, ostensibly a "free" country not occupied by the Germans, who physically controlled the Atlantic and Channel coastal areas but who didn't want to be bothered with occupying the whole country and French territories in Africa.

It was supposedly neutral after the "armistice" with Germany, but its leaders willingly collaborated with Germany, enacting anti-Semitic laws and establishing interment camps.

Regarding armed confrontations between the Allies and Vichy France, the most noteworthy was probably the destruction of a number of French ships at a port in Algeria in July 1940, days after the armistice. Vichy had promised that the French navy would not fall into Nazi hands, but this didn't go far enough for the British. They demanded that Vichy either join with the Royal Navy to continue the fight or neutralize its ships in some fashion, including scuttling the fleet.

The ultimatum stipulated that the British would use whatever force it deemed necessary to ensure compliance. When Vichy did not comply, the British attacked and sank several ships at port, killing more than 1,000 French sailors.