as a german in my heart ill always love my great grandfather an his fighting. weiter kampfen fur alle deutsche soldaten..... welt krieg zwei is gewonnen in alle unsere herz.......und nie veloren. 6 lan auf niederlarge deutschland...... gluck hundin.
In 1938 the Czech themselves didn't fight for Prague. Moreover, it was the British PM who negociated the Munich agreement with Hitler. Had Britain not been such an "appeaser", France would have declared war against Hitler – as it did in 1939.
In 1940, 100,000 French soldiers were killed in the battle of France. Yes, teach us lessons of bravery, please.
Believing that any political organization is "ineffective since it was filled with hypocrits" is deliciously naive.
On the contrary, the League of nations was ineffective since it was inspired by idealists. They believed that they could appease Hitler with words, and ignored that Might makes Right.
i have no sympathy for the french or british when these two little weasles had oversees empires that were up to 10 times more in area than anything Germany put together during ww2. The atrocities against the jews was horrendous, but the invasion of other countries to gain territory is a seperate and totally justafiable matter, especially when you look at how much land Britian and france had. Tha'ts why the League of nations was ineffective. It was filled with hypocrits.
And,they coud not invade britain with there so cald luftwaffe. the germans blundered all the time. The RN and the RAF where to strong at dunkirk even if u say they did the 'chicken run'
jelisi1, we must try to understand how Hitler viewed things at that time. He (like many other leaders, including Roosevelt) had many reasons to believe that Britain would sue for peace, and accept a deal (Hitler ruling the continent and attacking USSR, leaving Britain in peace). He remembered that, after the Prussian victory over Austria in 1866, Bismarck had wisely NOT exploited his victory, preparing a later alliance with Austria. It made sense; but for Churchill !
Blitzkrieg is actually myth. This is a consequence of poor military history and the preponderance of popular accounts of the 1940 campaign. For example, German doctrinal innovation was due more to the unfavorable situation Germany faced rather than to any "revolution" in technology or concepts of warfare. Their planning the 1940 campaign did not expect a swift, easy defeat of France nor was its success solely attributable to technology, specifically tanks and airpower.
The french got what they deserved , after all they where the ones who caused ww2 with their policies after the end of ww1 , breaking up of Hungary the Germans should of broke france up into a dozen small countries ,
Fridomfry, the fact that you are claiming the raf to be in superior to your french one is a fallacy. Britain held out defeating the luftwaffe France didn't. Britain also shot down more planes then France did and contributed more then just a battleground
I'm not sure I understand your comment. What period are you talking of ? People often forget how fast things evolve in wartime. Let's keep to Spring 1940. The data I have indicate that the RAF was slightly superior to the French, its best fighter (Hurricane) being more numerous than the French equivalent (Dewoitine D520); and its radar systems being more operational. Both downed many German planes. Neither defeated the Luftwaffe, otherwise there would have been no subsequent battle of England.
The Maginot line was misunderstood. It was designed to channel the Germans. It did.
It would have held had the French and British stuck to the original plan of fighting a defensive war on French territory. Instead they adopted a forward defense strategy and the Germans broke the French hinge by coming out of the Ardennes.
Typical Britannica piece. Total misunderstanding and misrepresentation of events.
Well, many French also believed that the British were useless - with their obsolete tanks, tea-time break in battle, keeping most of the RAF in England instead of using it on the continent... Our British allies blundered in Norway, and finally took the chicken run in Dunkirk... Many British politicians wanted peace with Hitler... That was England's image in France in 1940.
Meanwhile, French pilots shot down 1000 German aircraft in combat.
there is some truth to your point,but are you sure that your airforce shot down that many german planes?that is a lot of aircraft.yes,lord halifax wanted to do a peace deal with hitler but churchill refused.
Good question. It is very difficult to be precisely sure about statistics on victories in dogfight. A pilot who's just shot an enemy must turn immediately to a new one, rather than playing the cameraman. There is a book, "Les Mille Victoires de la Chasse Française", which describes them in detail, squadron by squadron, day by day. On June 15th, 1940, the French kept 700 German airmen POWs. They handed them over to the British before the armistice.
Here, we are discussing facts. But what also interests me, is the image each nation has of other nations, and how this image was shaped. In 1939, everyone in the world considered French soldiers heroes, since they had hold in hell during 4 long years, and repelled the Beast at the Marne and at Verdun. Now, since France was beaten in 1940, essentially because of bad high command, today ignorant teenagers around the world type "french=surenderring monkiiies" on their computer.
yes im afraid to say the image we have in britain about the french army of 1940 is quite negative.but i am convinced that if the german army had landed in england then they would have defeated the british,i am sure of that.the germans had an excellent army with some great generals,guderian,rommel,ect.
The Germans would have defeated the small British army, but not the Royal Navy !
Be sure that none is more conscious than the French themselves of the weaknesses of France in 1940. Simply we don't accept lessons from nations across the Atlantic which stood idle while we were fighting - well or poorly, we fought.
it's sadly a product of bad american education system, kids these days take no fucking initiative to learn military history or european history. they have no fucking clue of tours, salamis, verdun, or trafalgar
as a german in my heart ill always love my great grandfather an his fighting. weiter kampfen fur alle deutsche soldaten..... welt krieg zwei is gewonnen in alle unsere herz.......und nie veloren. 6 lan auf niederlarge deutschland...... gluck hundin.
lilkandy555 9 months ago
@lilkandy555 Was für ein kläglicher Versuch, die Deutschen unsympathisch zu machen.
my8miles 7 months ago
Fuck France, And Trianon. Viva viva hungaria
lolcatish 1 year ago
"Brave" French:
In 1938 they didn't want to fight for Prague!
In 1939 they didn't want to fight for Gdańsk and Warsaw!!
In 1940 they didn't want to fight for Paris!!!
The worst cowards of Europe.
ThePalnik 1 year ago 2
@ThePalnik
WHERE IS NAPOLEON WHEN YOU NEED HIM!!!!
FELOOx1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In 1938 the Czech themselves didn't fight for Prague. Moreover, it was the British PM who negociated the Munich agreement with Hitler. Had Britain not been such an "appeaser", France would have declared war against Hitler – as it did in 1939.
In 1940, 100,000 French soldiers were killed in the battle of France. Yes, teach us lessons of bravery, please.
Fridomfry 1 year ago
Believing that any political organization is "ineffective since it was filled with hypocrits" is deliciously naive.
On the contrary, the League of nations was ineffective since it was inspired by idealists. They believed that they could appease Hitler with words, and ignored that Might makes Right.
Fridomfry 2 years ago
i have no sympathy for the french or british when these two little weasles had oversees empires that were up to 10 times more in area than anything Germany put together during ww2. The atrocities against the jews was horrendous, but the invasion of other countries to gain territory is a seperate and totally justafiable matter, especially when you look at how much land Britian and france had. Tha'ts why the League of nations was ineffective. It was filled with hypocrits.
alexgomez83 2 years ago
Good Grief, a lecture on Imperialism from an American. Whatever next?
LordGodofMercy 2 years ago
haha, good point.!
alexgomez83 2 years ago
they surrenedered in less than 6 weeks.
Noobssuckass300 2 years ago
Yes. Nothing to be proud of. Just remember that the British army was beaten flat as well, and took the chicken run at Dunkirk after 3 weeks only
Fridomfry 2 years ago
The germans blundered at dunkirk
every day the british saved around 60 000 men!
And,they coud not invade britain with there so cald luftwaffe. the germans blundered all the time. The RN and the RAF where to strong at dunkirk even if u say they did the 'chicken run'
jelisi1 2 years ago
jelisi1, we must try to understand how Hitler viewed things at that time. He (like many other leaders, including Roosevelt) had many reasons to believe that Britain would sue for peace, and accept a deal (Hitler ruling the continent and attacking USSR, leaving Britain in peace). He remembered that, after the Prussian victory over Austria in 1866, Bismarck had wisely NOT exploited his victory, preparing a later alliance with Austria. It made sense; but for Churchill !
Fridomfry 2 years ago
Germans had another plan to invade Britain "Operation sealions" but it was cancelled hoping there would be a peace with Britain !
lookgooddz 2 years ago
word.
Noobssuckass300 2 years ago
tranmere you are vary wrong...
after ww1 the Germans completly rewised ther Startegy and tactics.Prehaps by going back to Calusewitz Books...
But its defenetly not a Myth...
armenius25 2 years ago
Blitzkrieg is actually myth. This is a consequence of poor military history and the preponderance of popular accounts of the 1940 campaign. For example, German doctrinal innovation was due more to the unfavorable situation Germany faced rather than to any "revolution" in technology or concepts of warfare. Their planning the 1940 campaign did not expect a swift, easy defeat of France nor was its success solely attributable to technology, specifically tanks and airpower.
tranmere789 2 years ago
The french got what they deserved , after all they where the ones who caused ww2 with their policies after the end of ww1 , breaking up of Hungary the Germans should of broke france up into a dozen small countries ,
overflow77 3 years ago
Fridomfry, the fact that you are claiming the raf to be in superior to your french one is a fallacy. Britain held out defeating the luftwaffe France didn't. Britain also shot down more planes then France did and contributed more then just a battleground
Lionsdale 3 years ago
I'm not sure I understand your comment. What period are you talking of ? People often forget how fast things evolve in wartime. Let's keep to Spring 1940. The data I have indicate that the RAF was slightly superior to the French, its best fighter (Hurricane) being more numerous than the French equivalent (Dewoitine D520); and its radar systems being more operational. Both downed many German planes. Neither defeated the Luftwaffe, otherwise there would have been no subsequent battle of England.
Fridomfry 3 years ago
if we lisend to chirchill in the first place and not baldwin and chamberlin mabey just mabey we could have stoped the nazi exspanshon
thebritish25 3 years ago
The Maginot line was misunderstood. It was designed to channel the Germans. It did.
It would have held had the French and British stuck to the original plan of fighting a defensive war on French territory. Instead they adopted a forward defense strategy and the Germans broke the French hinge by coming out of the Ardennes.
Typical Britannica piece. Total misunderstanding and misrepresentation of events.
msimon6808 4 years ago 2
the french were useless,large parts of the french army didnt even want to fight.
goldyn12345 4 years ago
Well, many French also believed that the British were useless - with their obsolete tanks, tea-time break in battle, keeping most of the RAF in England instead of using it on the continent... Our British allies blundered in Norway, and finally took the chicken run in Dunkirk... Many British politicians wanted peace with Hitler... That was England's image in France in 1940.
Meanwhile, French pilots shot down 1000 German aircraft in combat.
Fridomfry 3 years ago 2
there is some truth to your point,but are you sure that your airforce shot down that many german planes?that is a lot of aircraft.yes,lord halifax wanted to do a peace deal with hitler but churchill refused.
goldyn12345 3 years ago
Good question. It is very difficult to be precisely sure about statistics on victories in dogfight. A pilot who's just shot an enemy must turn immediately to a new one, rather than playing the cameraman. There is a book, "Les Mille Victoires de la Chasse Française", which describes them in detail, squadron by squadron, day by day. On June 15th, 1940, the French kept 700 German airmen POWs. They handed them over to the British before the armistice.
Fridomfry 3 years ago
Here, we are discussing facts. But what also interests me, is the image each nation has of other nations, and how this image was shaped. In 1939, everyone in the world considered French soldiers heroes, since they had hold in hell during 4 long years, and repelled the Beast at the Marne and at Verdun. Now, since France was beaten in 1940, essentially because of bad high command, today ignorant teenagers around the world type "french=surenderring monkiiies" on their computer.
Fridomfry 3 years ago
yes im afraid to say the image we have in britain about the french army of 1940 is quite negative.but i am convinced that if the german army had landed in england then they would have defeated the british,i am sure of that.the germans had an excellent army with some great generals,guderian,rommel,ect.
goldyn12345 3 years ago
The Germans would have defeated the small British army, but not the Royal Navy !
Be sure that none is more conscious than the French themselves of the weaknesses of France in 1940. Simply we don't accept lessons from nations across the Atlantic which stood idle while we were fighting - well or poorly, we fought.
Fridomfry 3 years ago
it's sadly a product of bad american education system, kids these days take no fucking initiative to learn military history or european history. they have no fucking clue of tours, salamis, verdun, or trafalgar
Track14 3 years ago 5
@Track14
i blame democrats
and sadly i only know what Tours is.
Xssam11 1 year ago
was that the eiffel tower falling?, sorry, im just askin XD
Rasengan854 4 years ago
No, just part of a church.
DeutschePatriot 4 years ago
I am not in favour of any war, or any invasion to any country... but this one, was (from military point of view) good...
french, should have never been considered as a super power... they lack strategy, planning, and have pride (which could be tourned against them)
avniade 4 years ago
french old pride was swallowed dry
they deserved this modesty lesson
Highlanderswave83 4 years ago
nice Invasion
Crysis12 4 years ago
nice video..i wonder if a Frenchmen posted this video
pawnp4 4 years ago 2