@Lioyd1rving Ce type est un fou qui inonde les sites YouTube en insultant la France. Ta réponse est très pertinente et elle influencera d'autres lecteurs que lui. Ce n'est pas un pb de "dumb Yank", mais de "sick brain".
Dunkirk was not done in an attemt to gain peace with Britain, it was to prevent the need to feed the thousands of soldiers who would have been take prisoner. They where already trying to leave mainland Europe, allowing them to was the most logical plan. Hitler himself had nothing to do with the dissision, it was his Generals who did.
@dave19941000 Nobody let the BEF escape at Dunkirk, The Germans knew that 300,000-troops were trapped with no escape. Goering said the Luftwaffe could take care of things. Even the Royal Navy only planned to rescue 50,000troops. However in the Greatest escape in history 300,000 trooped were killed. If you honestly think that the Germans knew the Allies could escape you are a fool.
a German tourist at the border custom office is asked by a French " officer" : Occupation sir?!.... The German tourist replays : Oooo no:) ..Just visiting !!!!
There's people who put hatefull comment of France (like the one below me) but no one talk about --> Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Thailand, Finland, Iraq, Japan, Most Serene Republic of San Marino, Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Kingdom of Denmark, Norway and the others who were suporter (ex:Austria) or failed in the invasion of there country from the AXIS. Just think about it.
Did France use that same train that Hitler used to humiliate the French, to humiliate the defeated ugly Nazi GERMans?
I hope they did.
The main reason why Nazi GERMany was successful in WWII is because it had a much bigger population then nearby countries and it had a friendship pact with Russia (Molotov-Ribbentrop pact) where Russia gave Germany TWO YEARS of oil and war materials that Germany did not have.
Nazi bombs dropped on Poland, France & England were made from Russian material
@mkrsk No. When the German surrendered in 1945 to the US, USSR, France and Britain, it was in two places : • at Eisenhower's HG in Reims • in Berlin.
And, yes, the German war machine could not have crushed western democracies without the huge Soviet supplies of raw material – and the security of not having to fight on two fronts as in 1914.
@Russian3600 You are right, gospodine: In 1939 The French failed to recognize that the USSR was allied with Hitler, and therefore it was unwise to declare war to Germany. It was stupid, but certainly more courageous than staying neutral…
LES ALLEMANDS EST LE PEUPLE NON GERMANIUE PEUPLE!, DANS L'ADN DES ALLEMANDS NE DOMINE PAS GERMANIUE HAPLOGROUPE I1! CHEZ LES ALLEMANDS DOMINE CELTIQUE HAPLOGROUPE R1b, LES PEUPLES DU MONDE DOIVENT CESSER D'ADMIRER LES ALLEMANDS ht tp://w w w. eupedia. com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups. shtml
If the Versailles treaty of WW1 wouldn't be so rude with Germany, then WW2 probably wouldn't happen and over 50 millions of people wouldn't died. Congratulations Allies.
Poland always blame evryone else for Germany invading them. WHy werent they building up a big modern army in the period before instead of using outdated stuff and horses.
But no, it wasnt their useless armies fault, it was Britain and Frances fault, go figure.
the british epiditionary force along with the french and belgiums trapped at dunkirn were spared because hitler ordered his tank commander general to not proceed to verdun,thus gave the allies a window to escape,many ponder even today hitlers blunder and many reasons are given...hitler was an idiot,and madman.
@andrewkenworthy some believe Hitler let the english escape dunkirk in an effort to stop the war between both sides. hotler never wanted war with england and by showing mercy he hoped this would prove it. of course some people dont dare accept hitler was anything more than a warmonger but the truth is that churchill was the man who loved war. he even searched for the chance to fight as a young man and germany would never have peace with england while churchill was in power.
@blackmourning11 While it is true Churchill was a warmonger history has validated him. But yes, he was not the great hero some make him out to be. Gallipoli was his fault. Hundreds of thousands of men died there for nothing.
@blackmourning11 this is true, twice hitler asked great britain for peace and twice it was refused; it has been quoted that hitler wanted the british to fight with him; would have been interesting if they did, the entire british empire would now be allied with germany; where would that had left canada? the u.s would have been virtually alone, a war lasting years with neither side having the means to commit a ground attack across the atlantic
@slapmyfunkybass Actually, Germany would have won. The Combined sea power of France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Japan, UK and other European countries would have crushed America. (The eruopean fleets would have been captured)
@blackmourning11 What mercy? During Dunkirk Hitler knew the Allies were trapped. 350,000+-troops with no "escape". Hitler sent the Luftwaffe to wipe out the Allies. 50,000+ British,French troops were killed/captured and 300,000 were saved in the Greatest escape in history. Even Churchill said that at best the R.N might save 50,000+ nobody ever thought 300,000 would be saved in such short time,GOD BLESS BRITANNIA P.S Yes Churchill was war mongor, But Hitler started the war he refused peace 1939.
@martynrobin121 That's the best description, thanks. Hitler only retained his attritioned Wehrmacht to send the Luftwaffe in order to finish off the BEF and the French defenders of Dunkirk. He also preferred to give the Luftwaffe full credit for the victory, as the Luftwaffe was much more Nazi than the Wehrmacht.
@Hippophilee The Luftwaffe played ahuge role during Battle of France, The Luftwaffe outnumbered the RAF & FAF 2-1, The Luftwaffe was the best in Europe. The BEF and main French Forces were trapped, Why send your Armies to die, When Hitler could just send his Air-Force to "exterminate" the trapped Allies on the Beaches. Hitler sent the Luftwaffe to crush the trapped Allies, And his Armies south for the final push on France with Italy from the South who proved ineffective.
1:38 The genious planning Sichelschnitt was Erich von Manstein and NOT "Fritz" von Manstein. ouch Americanos......bad comment, and even that plan was only accepted because a german plane with the original plans had to make an emergency landing in Belgium, which is not mentioned here.....
THE ONLY REASON WHY THE GERMANS LOST IS BECAUSE THEY WERE SPREAD OUT TO THIN WHILE FIGHTING THE RUSSIANS, USA, FRANCE AND GREAT BRITAIN...PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!
@Xiolablu3 none of tehm can be compared to russia or britian or the USA. yes except for japan but they where fighting far over the other side of the world. the thing that matters most is the amount of soldiers and viechles. which germany and their so called allies had MUCH LESS. germany was strong due to their engineering, tactics, strategies, dicipline, organization ETC.
@Blo0pTheZombies Allies in 1940 did not lack technology or discipline. Allied tanks tanks surpassed Germans as well as artillery. Contrary to legend, the French army did not flee, but often remained in combat until the annihilation of entire regiments. soldiers mingled with civilians on the roads were survivors.
@DuguesclinBZH the panther was well respected in the allies, even the US says that it was the best meduim size tank ever created in ww2. the tiger could hold of 6 sherman, in battle for stalingrad one tiger held off 11 t 34's. the thing that matterd was the number of t-34's and shermans built. germany was running out of resources. yes russia has good disicipline but the US did not have as much disipline as germany. german tactics over whelmed french and russia. there were not enough units.
@Blo0pTheZombies Excuse me but I was talking about 1940. The panther did not exist and the "best" tanks were French (Somua 35, B1bis ...). A similar story with the tiger versus 11 T34 exist. One B1bis destroying an entire column of German tanks. He returned to base due to lack of ammunition with 140 impacts in its armor.
Of course, all the rest of the war, the Germans have surpassed the allies with their mechanical engineering.
-A pacifism context due to the cruelty of the First World War (especially in France). Nobody wants or imagines revive a war. Trench warfare is still present in our minds. We prefer to build the Maginot Line as equipment for war movement. It is believed that if a war must be mild, it will be a defensive war and especially not offensive.
-As you say, the tactics of the last war. Generals overwhelmed by modern warfare. Despite very good officers as De Gaulle and his doctrine of tanks (What Guderian approved), the high command has consistently failed to understand that the time for heroic bayonet charge was over. It simply did not understand the real interests of tank.
@leopardnew from your comments i can tell you have no real knowledge of what happened after the french and brittish forces were beaten by the germans in the invasion of france.the biggest invasion ever put together in history was put togather to free france its called D-DAY LOOK IT UP .
@leopardnew from your comments i can tell you have no real knowledge of what happened after the french and brittish forces were beaten by the germans in the invasion of france.the biggest invasion ever put together in history was put together to free france its called D-DAY LOOK IT UP .
@leopardnew ok so the alliance with poland was a lie in your view.the point this film is making is while hitler was attacking poland on the eastern front of germany france, the allie of poland sitting on the western front of germany sat and did nothing .this is the truth.sure private frenchie was not responsible but surely the leaders of france were.
lol neither could the UK. The USSR and US had a way bigger population and territory, it's easy to talk when you can outnumber the ennemy 5 to 1, and/or have an ocean or a sea that panzers cannot cross :)
@bpiotrAgain yeah we screwed up leaving poland to the soviets, but there wouldn't be any poles left if the nazis were still in control of poland. it may have sucked to live under the soviets, but its better than dying under the nazi's
But the fact is, French people were not ready for another World War.
WW1 bled the French demographics very deep. Not to mention most French military were distrustful of their commanders after WW1, who sent them in bloody assault where thousands died.
On the opposite end, the Germans had all their confidence back thanks to the Fuhrer
But keep in mind that the real criminal is Woodrow Wilson, which did not let the French choose their terms after WW1 where they were victorious
lol that's foolish...the terms of versailles, which were mostly dictated by france were a reason for hitler to become elected! so your own terms made the invasion of france possible!
Paris is more dangerous than any ghetto neighborhood un USA. Your not sissies that for sure. Is there a lot ethnic minorities in Paris/Marseilles/Brittany? Pershing supposedly was friends with Petain during WW1.
France was once a superpower when it came to military might. Many times throughout history, France waged wars both at home and abroad and many times came up victorious. Hell, they conquered much of Europe under Napoleon! Recently, yes, France has not been near the same militarily, all but losing to Prussia in 1870, and losing to Germany in 1914 and 1940, but to say they "don't have the balls to stand and fight" is grossly inaccurate.
@MsObirah Yes, you are correct. Not sure why I believed otherwise for a moment there. Perhaps I had meant to say that France COULD have lost without help from the rest of the Entente. Thank you for the correction.
@Smalbop France won this war not alone of course, with our allies, our friends (UK, US etc...). France paid this victory by 1 400 000 soldiers KIA during 5 long years, northern France devastated, occuped, looted. Don't forget that and I can say yes! France won this War!
The German casualties were even higher by 50 %. This is because Germany had only half of its army in France, the other half destroyed the Russian empire in the meantime. Concerning destructions and casualties of the French you remind me not to forget them but I remind you not to forget that this was the first German attack in about 25 French-German wars, and after 1814-15 and 1870-71 only the 3rd of these wars which destroyed not alone German cities and killed German civilians...
@sidddde11 no, hitler wasnt a military genius. u know nothing of history. do u think hitler drew out these plans? u idiiots, hitler was the very reason why the germans didnt win the war in 1940. go look into if u give a shit.
This video forget to mention French covered the Allied retreat in Dunkirk/Dunkerque, also saying French didn't resist much is unexact. The soldiers fought well, but too many of our leaders screwed up too bad and there it goes.
I am a German and I agree with you. The French bore the brunt of the German invasion and many French units fought with valor. The French were abandoned by the English - just before the English sank the French fleet at Oran. Winners write history books and the French (unfortunately for them) are counted among the losers of WWII.
They were taken in by the FILTHY BBC LIES!!! But did you ever hear anything about Churchill? With his cigars and his brandy, disgusting! He was a crap painter! Hitler. Now he was a painter. He could paint a whole apartment in 1 afternoon. 2 coats!
@Fittykent I guess I never thought of measuring the capacity of somone to lead a nation by their painting ability. Now that I have, I regret the waste of time.
@krautschmidt I think that's a bit of a shortsighted comment. I wouldn't call the Evacuation of Dunkirk "abandoning" the French. The British offered aerial bombings of Germany, France declined. France could have struck first, they chose to sit and wait. While the sinking of the French fleet at Oran was at the very least controversial, Britain lost just about every piece of military hardware it had trying to save France, and had to take precautions since the Battle of Britain was about to begin.
@Zornkatzu Your right. I intended to say the British never made a serious effort to help defend Western Europe. 10 divisions - not sure if the Brits outnumbered the Belgians in that effort---. Britain was willing to fight to the last Frenchman, when that didn't work they decided to fight to the last Russian.
@SaitoYoshida I suppose you make a good point, though if I were Churchill's Britain and staring down the barrel of Hitler's Germany, I would have focused on my home country's defenses as well. France lost miserably, but Britain knew that Germany was never, ever going to be able to defeat Russia head-on. So, they held their resolve and refused to give in, frustrating Hitler into (foolishly) attacking the mighty Soviet Red Army.
@Zornkatzu that's bullshit! even american and british generals thought that the soviet union would collapse within weeks...and it wasn't the brits who frustrated hitler to attacking the soviets, it was his plan ever since!
@nightwish1000 Well of course their plan was to, ultimately, attack the Soviet Union. However, Hitler did not want a war on two fronts. They signed a deal with the Soviet Union and began sweeping across Western Europe. When they were unable to engage Operation Sea Lion and invade Britain, they became frustrated and unleashed Operation Barbarossa on the Soviet Union earlier than they had wanted. The might of the Soviet Union crushed the Germans come winter, and Britain had time to recover.
@Zornkatzu no that's not correct! operation barbarossa wasn't a consequence of the failure in britain! the germans needed fuel at that time and there is still the speculation that stalin could have attacked in the east at first! the battle of britain simply took too long and operation sea lion was first of all a menace for the brits to give up, even hitler knew that it was difficult to carry it out also that he couldn't have started his ideological soviet campaign either then!
@nightwish1000 I'm afraid you may have misunderstood me. I didn't say Operation Barbarossa was BECAUSE of the successful defense of Britain. What I said was that Operation Barbarossa was engaged SOONER than Germany had wanted. Germany wanted the Western Front finished before opening the Eastern Front. When they were unable to defeat Britain, and thus complete the Western Front, they opened the Eastern Front anyway, thus starting a war on two fronts. This pretty much cost Germany the war.
@Zornkatzu germany could have beaten russia u know. the main reason they didnt was that their armies became bogged down in moscow and stalingdrad. u see, they panzer armies work well in open terrians but in a city, not so much.
well also note that the Russians could replace their losses way easier than the Germans. The russians tank, were good, even if the panzers were better, and could be repaired easily.
Say if they lost 1200 tanks in a battle, in less than a week they would have repaired 900 of the damaged tanks.
@Zornkatzu i would call it abandoning the french actually, but the british had no other choice. they had to leave the french so that they would have some hope of winning the war in the long run.
It wasn't just America, It was America, Russia, Britain, France, Poland, Canada, New Zealand, Greece, and various patisans and resistance groups against Germany.
So it was like 10 contries against Germany. Not very fair
@Len1977gt i agree that it was every country making up the allied forces and not just the americans. didn't mean 2 take all the credit. however, without the backing of america, a victory over the nazis would have been less likely
hey man, I think you took my comment the wrong way, all I saying was Germany probably had one of the best armies in the world, and they were tough to defeat. It took alot of countries to defeat Germany, that is all.
@Len1977gt sorry if i took it the wrong way didn't mean 2. most will agree that the germans were tough and fought bravely. however, i will say that the principles that they fought for (i.e., nazi values and beliefs under hitler's command) were seriously misplaced
@Len1977gt yea but who started the war between germany and amerca? or the war between germany and russia? it was germany who provoked the war with france and britain too.and war not being fair? are u a fool?
What i am saying is not confusing. Not at all. The tea party movement is about restoring the United States back to the way the founding fathers intended the US to be. Now i have done my homework, research i'd like to call it on why the US government is so corrupt. Its more corrupt than you think it is. How ever Liberals have been going a smear campaign for quite some time now because their desperate to keep the Liberal agenda hidden and transparent. It sounds like to me that you are a Liberal.
The Germans probably had the best army In world war two. They lost due to fighting on too many fronts against too many country's and so were out numbered also allies had superior air capabilities and economy's to build planes and tanks faster.
Still their army was well trained. The Americans and Brits also had well trained army's but the Italians army was a joke probably one of the worst trained army's in the war
@hopeurforfreedom Im a American, My Father is Scandinavian ( Swedish ) and my mother is French, so I have Swedish and French. I can dumbell bench press 120 pounds, and sqaut 225 for 48 reps. So the French are not weak, my mothers maid name comes from Muscketeer origins.
@nojokenygren You are American, not French. If you mother lives in America, she is American of French ancestry. I have German/Swiss/Swedish and Choctaw Indian ancestry, but I am 100% American.
France has turned into a country full of wine drinking cheese eating surrendering monkeys. They were absolutely victorious in the first world war. What made them the complete opposite between world wars i don't know. France got what is diserved from the Germans for the what the French did to Germany after WW1. The Treaty of Versailles crippled Germany for something the Germans didn't do. Germany only took a side in WW1 they were not responsible for it. So why make them pay for war damages.
a general who forgets to equipe his men with winter coats when going to 'siberia-land' isn't a great genius. Besides the world was divided with politicaland civil unrest, France was about only the country which was stable so Nap took advantage of that. Hitler had the British, Americans and soviets on his back yet he managed to conquor that stupid-ass country.
That's a response to my post about Napoleon isn't it? Well I guess a part of US population was supporting France, but nevertheless, the US policy and the trade arrangement didn't make things easy for Napoleon and the French.
cool, could you justify a bit ? We are thaught that clovis, charles martel and Charlemagne were french, even if the franks originally came from germany.
I thought Charlemagne would have had way more german territories if he was german.
@Kamfrenchie first of all, in a strict historical sense, all of them were neither french nor german as both countries didn't exist, so the question of territory is obsolete! you can only argue by cultural background! clovis, charlemagne and also the royal court at paris spoke oldgerman for centuries! frankish doesn't mean french, you just kept the name! in fact the main part of germany was frankish under charlemagne!
@Kamfrenchie the origin of the difference between the French and Germans was founded by Julius Caesar.
When crossing the Rhine with his legions, he finds himself in an immense forest inhabited by bloodthirsty barbarians, so he decided to turn back.
That is what he noted in his memoirs.
In reality the Germans and the Gauls have a similar culture. Caesar has just decreed that the Gauls were causing enough problems to go look for others behind the Rhine.
well Tmineff if you put it in that position mostly it was the Germans against the world since the Italians had a sucky army and the Japanese had much conquering to do on the East. It was sweet how the French got humiliated. Great Millitary tactics by the Germans and very weak resistance from the French.
The French lost 100,000 soldiers in combat in May-June 1940, and shot down some 1,000 German airplanes. How can you call that a "weak resistance"?
AFAIK, your country (a you write from the US) stood cautiously neutral, while it had promised in 1919 to support France and Belgium, in case of Germany becoming warlike again.
Mexico is my country not the US and yes i agree that the US stood neutral but the French did not fight like the Soviets where every single person demonstrated courage and fought till the last man. French military should have prepared since Germany was showing signs of aggression.
In every army, people and units showed courage, while others collapsed. Sometimes the same unit can fight heroically in a dozen battles, then throw in the towel. Remember that the Russians :
- Had abandoned their allies in 1917, with tragic consequences for all.
- Were allied with the Nazis until 1941.
- Surrendered in mass in 1941 and 1942, so that Hitler could even create a Russian army
The same nation fought heroically at Leningrad and Stalingrad.
Russians had a history of victory and triumph. What separated the Russians from the Polish and French was their leader. Stalin was eager to win, especially with the oncoming Western Allied assistance, ready to relieve extreme pressure.
It's not "a shame": The French military conquest of Europe was bound to reach an end, even with Napoleon's genious and the French military experience of that time. As you say, it just couldn't last against the major European powers allied. Basically, the revolution had destroyed the excellent French navy organized under Louis 16. Thus, England ruled the oceans. Sea powers always rule over land powers. Plus the destruction of the Grande Armee in Russia.
its a shame however that France didnt take action when it had no opposition
it could have been a key player in the war i know great kingdoms dont last forever and Napoleons France was not what it was once but u think they would take the opportunity to try to crush hitler while he was undefended instead of sitting n waiting
It must be annoying how everytime someone brings up war they have to be reminded of their most devestating defeat in 1941
They had a pretty professional army with good tanks and artillery and were prepared to fight as hard as they did in WW1 , but they made a huge mistake.
They were not prepared for World War II-Though WW1 was entirely different when 2 came around the french,even there once machinery did not modernize like the Germans-they were not prepared-The Germans feared the French because of World War I but that soon was disspelled as well
They didn't react because Liberalism had already take over France like it is today. Between world war they turned into a bunch of surrendering monkeys. Yes they were a key player in ww2 with their French resitance force. Napoleon should have know better than to fuck around with Britain and Russia. His arrogance got the best of him. Today as a result of their liberal ways. France will be a muslim country by 2050 and the rest of Europe aswell.Modern Europe has sold it self to muslims and socialist
No surrendering monkeys is a racial slur i use toward the French because they are what they are. A bunch of cheese eating wine drinking arrogant surrendering monkeys. They can't find their ass home from the Rhine during WW2. By the way the Simpsons are fucking queer.
"By the way the Simpsons are fucking queer. " Then why do you quote the show word-for-word in a discussion about WW2? Is it true that Americans can't think for themselves, but have minds that are programmed by the television? It seems so. Best wishes my friend.
The TV is tool of mind control. If you do not limit your TV time soon that TV will control your everyday life. A TV is capable of manipulating and even worse brainwash the public. Just look at how Barack Obama became president. The world elites manipulating the public through TV to get Barack Obama elected. They did through every single news media network but Fox. Now fox is slightly bias too but to the right and not the far left. Some stuff they say is true and some isn't. Thats what a TV is.
No. I am Catholic. What i told you is true. To make a long story short. The future of the United States is uncertain. It is on the verge of becoming a police state. Like Nazi Germany was. Fema has camps that are fenced with barb wire. Obama's rise to power was during bad economic times. So did Hitler. Its only a matter of time before Obama starts killing off his opposition. The tea party movement is doing the right thing. If your not American research the tea party movement. Its interesting.
Well, the tea party movement is being coopted by the neo-nazi movement according to reports I have seen. So if you are a Catholic, you'd better do some homework before you go supporting them. But you really sound like a zionist Jew to me anyway. They always come up with f***ked up stuff like what you are saying to confuse people. :)
You're wrong. First you make generalization about people, then, Napoleon didn't fuck around with British and Russia, It was the British who supported all the coalitions made to invade France at that time. Napoleon mostly fought defensive wars.
And it isn't because of Liberalism French army failed. SImply, French become pacifists after the horror of WW1 since only their lands were ruined (plus Paris got bombed a few times), and they were using old tactics. Plus they had no sea to protect them.
la snooty French....surrender like pussies
gopconservative78 1 month ago
@gopconservative78 "La snooty French" surrended like any outgunned, outmanned and outflanked country would, dumb Yank.
Lioyd1rving 1 month ago
@Lioyd1rving Ce type est un fou qui inonde les sites YouTube en insultant la France. Ta réponse est très pertinente et elle influencera d'autres lecteurs que lui. Ce n'est pas un pb de "dumb Yank", mais de "sick brain".
Hippophilee 2 weeks ago
Italian troops are junks lol
Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh 1 month ago
Hitler is guilty only for the extermionation of millions of Jews, and nothing else. Churchill is the one who dragged on the War.
demurat 3 months ago
Dunkirk was not done in an attemt to gain peace with Britain, it was to prevent the need to feed the thousands of soldiers who would have been take prisoner. They where already trying to leave mainland Europe, allowing them to was the most logical plan. Hitler himself had nothing to do with the dissision, it was his Generals who did.
dave19941000 3 months ago
@dave19941000 Nobody let the BEF escape at Dunkirk, The Germans knew that 300,000-troops were trapped with no escape. Goering said the Luftwaffe could take care of things. Even the Royal Navy only planned to rescue 50,000troops. However in the Greatest escape in history 300,000 trooped were killed. If you honestly think that the Germans knew the Allies could escape you are a fool.
martynrobin121 2 months ago in playlist WW2 Timeline
a German tourist at the border custom office is asked by a French " officer" : Occupation sir?!.... The German tourist replays : Oooo no:) ..Just visiting !!!!
ktincosmin 4 months ago
There's people who put hatefull comment of France (like the one below me) but no one talk about --> Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Thailand, Finland, Iraq, Japan, Most Serene Republic of San Marino, Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Kingdom of Denmark, Norway and the others who were suporter (ex:Austria) or failed in the invasion of there country from the AXIS. Just think about it.
darkalex211 5 months ago
French are a bunch of pussies.
mrceebees14 6 months ago
Did France use that same train that Hitler used to humiliate the French, to humiliate the defeated ugly Nazi GERMans?
I hope they did.
The main reason why Nazi GERMany was successful in WWII is because it had a much bigger population then nearby countries and it had a friendship pact with Russia (Molotov-Ribbentrop pact) where Russia gave Germany TWO YEARS of oil and war materials that Germany did not have.
Nazi bombs dropped on Poland, France & England were made from Russian material
mkrsk 6 months ago
@mkrsk No. When the German surrendered in 1945 to the US, USSR, France and Britain, it was in two places : • at Eisenhower's HG in Reims • in Berlin.
And, yes, the German war machine could not have crushed western democracies without the huge Soviet supplies of raw material – and the security of not having to fight on two fronts as in 1914.
Hippophilee 1 week ago
stupid french they are useless.. they can only cook
MyRickus 7 months ago
I'm pretty sure Hitler prevented his army from wiping out those left at Dunkerque and gave them time to escape...
OrthodoxDarwinist 8 months ago
The french always fail to recognize something
Russian3600 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Russian3600 You are right, gospodine: In 1939 The French failed to recognize that the USSR was allied with Hitler, and therefore it was unwise to declare war to Germany. It was stupid, but certainly more courageous than staying neutral…
Got the message?
Hippophilee 1 week ago
the french are a FAIL
bloodgordge 9 months ago
@bloodgordge no
Superchickenman159 9 months ago
@bloodgordge HURRRRDURRRRRR, that's not how you spell that.
rocksparadox 2 months ago
*Musketeer
nojokenygren 9 months ago
LES ALLEMANDS EST LE PEUPLE NON GERMANIUE PEUPLE!, DANS L'ADN DES ALLEMANDS NE DOMINE PAS GERMANIUE HAPLOGROUPE I1! CHEZ LES ALLEMANDS DOMINE CELTIQUE HAPLOGROUPE R1b, LES PEUPLES DU MONDE DOIVENT CESSER D'ADMIRER LES ALLEMANDS ht tp://w w w. eupedia. com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups. shtml
GermansNotGermanic 11 months ago
If the Versailles treaty of WW1 wouldn't be so rude with Germany, then WW2 probably wouldn't happen and over 50 millions of people wouldn't died. Congratulations Allies.
xPrussianPrince 11 months ago
@xPrussianPrince Vae victis.
NFL9475 5 months ago
Poland always blame evryone else for Germany invading them. WHy werent they building up a big modern army in the period before instead of using outdated stuff and horses.
But no, it wasnt their useless armies fault, it was Britain and Frances fault, go figure.
Xiolablu3 1 year ago
"Any man who pursues an ideal in his own way is never without enemies." -- Gatson Bates
SupplantThis 1 year ago
He should have burned Paris to the fucking ground for revenge of that unholy treaty.
jave042 1 year ago
the british epiditionary force along with the french and belgiums trapped at dunkirn were spared because hitler ordered his tank commander general to not proceed to verdun,thus gave the allies a window to escape,many ponder even today hitlers blunder and many reasons are given...hitler was an idiot,and madman.
andrewkenworthy 1 year ago
@andrewkenworthy some believe Hitler let the english escape dunkirk in an effort to stop the war between both sides. hotler never wanted war with england and by showing mercy he hoped this would prove it. of course some people dont dare accept hitler was anything more than a warmonger but the truth is that churchill was the man who loved war. he even searched for the chance to fight as a young man and germany would never have peace with england while churchill was in power.
blackmourning11 1 year ago 10
@blackmourning11 While it is true Churchill was a warmonger history has validated him. But yes, he was not the great hero some make him out to be. Gallipoli was his fault. Hundreds of thousands of men died there for nothing.
evildeathmonkey1 1 year ago
@blackmourning11 this is true, twice hitler asked great britain for peace and twice it was refused; it has been quoted that hitler wanted the british to fight with him; would have been interesting if they did, the entire british empire would now be allied with germany; where would that had left canada? the u.s would have been virtually alone, a war lasting years with neither side having the means to commit a ground attack across the atlantic
slapmyfunkybass 3 months ago
@slapmyfunkybass Actually, Germany would have won. The Combined sea power of France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Japan, UK and other European countries would have crushed America. (The eruopean fleets would have been captured)
tutorialreviewbrit 1 month ago
@blackmourning11 What mercy? During Dunkirk Hitler knew the Allies were trapped. 350,000+-troops with no "escape". Hitler sent the Luftwaffe to wipe out the Allies. 50,000+ British,French troops were killed/captured and 300,000 were saved in the Greatest escape in history. Even Churchill said that at best the R.N might save 50,000+ nobody ever thought 300,000 would be saved in such short time,GOD BLESS BRITANNIA P.S Yes Churchill was war mongor, But Hitler started the war he refused peace 1939.
martynrobin121 2 months ago in playlist WW2 Timeline
@martynrobin121 That's the best description, thanks. Hitler only retained his attritioned Wehrmacht to send the Luftwaffe in order to finish off the BEF and the French defenders of Dunkirk. He also preferred to give the Luftwaffe full credit for the victory, as the Luftwaffe was much more Nazi than the Wehrmacht.
Hippophilee 2 weeks ago
@Hippophilee The Luftwaffe played ahuge role during Battle of France, The Luftwaffe outnumbered the RAF & FAF 2-1, The Luftwaffe was the best in Europe. The BEF and main French Forces were trapped, Why send your Armies to die, When Hitler could just send his Air-Force to "exterminate" the trapped Allies on the Beaches. Hitler sent the Luftwaffe to crush the trapped Allies, And his Armies south for the final push on France with Italy from the South who proved ineffective.
martynrobin121 1 week ago
@blackmourning11
Peace with someone who killed millions of innocent because of his orders? Are you kidding me?
Dihyyy 1 month ago
1:38 The genious planning Sichelschnitt was Erich von Manstein and NOT "Fritz" von Manstein. ouch Americanos......bad comment, and even that plan was only accepted because a german plane with the original plans had to make an emergency landing in Belgium, which is not mentioned here.....
highperformer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PLEASE GOOGLE
Alex Jones Crashes Austin Pro-Gun Rally...
Alex Jones threatens Jeff Rense, has him kicked off GCN...
Alex Jones betrayed a patriot Christian family for $25,000 to ABC 20/20...
Alex Jones is married to a Jew...
William Cooper was correct in calling Alex Jones a coward liar...
Mike Delaney slams alex jones...
Alex Jones gets ass kicked, then snitches to the FBI...
Peter Schaenk slams Alex Jones...
Zombienationlive 1 year ago
THE ONLY REASON WHY THE GERMANS LOST IS BECAUSE THEY WERE SPREAD OUT TO THIN WHILE FIGHTING THE RUSSIANS, USA, FRANCE AND GREAT BRITAIN...PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!
Danny022479 1 year ago
@Danny022479 Errm, the Germans had loads of Allies themselves, Italy, Japan, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Burma, Austria etc etc etc
Xiolablu3 1 year ago
@Xiolablu3 none of tehm can be compared to russia or britian or the USA. yes except for japan but they where fighting far over the other side of the world. the thing that matters most is the amount of soldiers and viechles. which germany and their so called allies had MUCH LESS. germany was strong due to their engineering, tactics, strategies, dicipline, organization ETC.
Blo0pTheZombies 1 year ago
@Blo0pTheZombies Allies in 1940 did not lack technology or discipline. Allied tanks tanks surpassed Germans as well as artillery. Contrary to legend, the French army did not flee, but often remained in combat until the annihilation of entire regiments. soldiers mingled with civilians on the roads were survivors.
DuguesclinBZH 1 year ago
@DuguesclinBZH the panther was well respected in the allies, even the US says that it was the best meduim size tank ever created in ww2. the tiger could hold of 6 sherman, in battle for stalingrad one tiger held off 11 t 34's. the thing that matterd was the number of t-34's and shermans built. germany was running out of resources. yes russia has good disicipline but the US did not have as much disipline as germany. german tactics over whelmed french and russia. there were not enough units.
Blo0pTheZombies 1 year ago
@Blo0pTheZombies Excuse me but I was talking about 1940. The panther did not exist and the "best" tanks were French (Somua 35, B1bis ...). A similar story with the tiger versus 11 T34 exist. One B1bis destroying an entire column of German tanks. He returned to base due to lack of ammunition with 140 impacts in its armor.
Of course, all the rest of the war, the Germans have surpassed the allies with their mechanical engineering.
DuguesclinBZH 1 year ago
@Blo0pTheZombies The fault lies with two major factors:
-A pacifism context due to the cruelty of the First World War (especially in France). Nobody wants or imagines revive a war. Trench warfare is still present in our minds. We prefer to build the Maginot Line as equipment for war movement. It is believed that if a war must be mild, it will be a defensive war and especially not offensive.
DuguesclinBZH 1 year ago
@Blo0pTheZombies
-As you say, the tactics of the last war. Generals overwhelmed by modern warfare. Despite very good officers as De Gaulle and his doctrine of tanks (What Guderian approved), the high command has consistently failed to understand that the time for heroic bayonet charge was over. It simply did not understand the real interests of tank.
DuguesclinBZH 1 year ago
Comment removed
leopardnew 1 year ago
Comment removed
leopardnew 1 year ago
Comment removed
leopardnew 1 year ago
@leopardnew the britts were in france trying to save france.ever hear of dunkirk.oh and they al came back and saved france from the germans .D-DAY.
username0u812ic 1 year ago
Comment removed
leopardnew 1 year ago
@leopardnew from your comments i can tell you have no real knowledge of what happened after the french and brittish forces were beaten by the germans in the invasion of france.the biggest invasion ever put together in history was put togather to free france its called D-DAY LOOK IT UP .
username0u812ic 1 year ago
@leopardnew from your comments i can tell you have no real knowledge of what happened after the french and brittish forces were beaten by the germans in the invasion of france.the biggest invasion ever put together in history was put together to free france its called D-DAY LOOK IT UP .
username0u812ic 1 year ago
Comment removed
leopardnew 1 year ago
@leopardnew ok so the alliance with poland was a lie in your view.the point this film is making is while hitler was attacking poland on the eastern front of germany france, the allie of poland sitting on the western front of germany sat and did nothing .this is the truth.sure private frenchie was not responsible but surely the leaders of france were.
username0u812ic 1 year ago
Comment removed
leopardnew 1 year ago
@username0u812ic it wasnt the biggest invasion in history that was operation barbarossa
the german invasion of the soviet union but d-day was the worlds biggest amfibial invasion
a2k2k2k 1 year ago
fails to mention that hitler could have eaily destroyed the enitre bef. a big msitake by hitler.
rahulpower 1 year ago
im so glad we lost the war. poor soldiers. they were brave, you have to give them that.
hansbo11 1 year ago
france cannot win without allies pathetic^^
warkeeper23 1 year ago
@warkeeper23
lol neither could the UK. The USSR and US had a way bigger population and territory, it's easy to talk when you can outnumber the ennemy 5 to 1, and/or have an ocean or a sea that panzers cannot cross :)
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
How France and Britain "stopped" sHitler:
+1933-38 sHitler piss on Versaile Treaty :militarisation, Anshluss of Austria.
+1938 Munich Treason: Anshluss of Czechoslovakia.
+1939 Polish Ally left Alone.
-----------
=1940 bill with interesting Promotion:
"Bloody Conflict to 1945 and Cold War to 1989".
Congratulations for Western Allies:P
bpiotrAgain 1 year ago 2
@bpiotrAgain nice, but blame the usa as well as france and britain.
rahulpower 1 year ago
@bpiotrAgain And what did your country do to stop Hitler besides moaning about others not helping them?
Xiolablu3 1 year ago
@bpiotrAgain yeah we screwed up leaving poland to the soviets, but there wouldn't be any poles left if the nazis were still in control of poland. it may have sucked to live under the soviets, but its better than dying under the nazi's
LAND37 11 months ago
germany took this place easaly o.o
XXlordbillyXX 1 year ago
Cheese-eating Surrender Monkeys!!!!
RichieD814 1 year ago
France have one many wars, where was the star spangeled banner in Vietnam?
theultracoolfuzz 1 year ago
Thank's to 100.000 french soldiers dead during the Battle of France
christmar67 1 year ago
@wachaufeuropa
WTF are you talking about? Woodrow Wilson was against the treaty of versailes. He warned that the Germans wood seek revenge for it's bullshit terms.
You are straigh up talkin pure shit
donsargent 1 year ago 16
@donsargent Well, it is easy to say now, what he said..can you post a link on his speech?
qalexandros 10 months ago
France did not "lose" in a traditional military sense.
Although the Magino Line was seen as a fiasco, it worked as intended.
The main french force could have defeated Germany at the time.
Only, Maréchal Pétain was voted in with Emergency Powers, then surrendered all the military to Germany.
Now its arguable whether or not he made the right decision for France.
In my opinion he completely saved it because in the long run France would not have held against German tech.
wachaufeuropa 1 year ago
@wachaufeuropa
But the fact is, French people were not ready for another World War.
WW1 bled the French demographics very deep. Not to mention most French military were distrustful of their commanders after WW1, who sent them in bloody assault where thousands died.
On the opposite end, the Germans had all their confidence back thanks to the Fuhrer
But keep in mind that the real criminal is Woodrow Wilson, which did not let the French choose their terms after WW1 where they were victorious
wachaufeuropa 1 year ago
lol that's foolish...the terms of versailles, which were mostly dictated by france were a reason for hitler to become elected! so your own terms made the invasion of france possible!
nightwish1000 1 year ago
@wachaufeuropa I think the real fact of the matter is that the French have never.....ever had the balls to stand and fight.
griffy85b 1 year ago
@griffy85b
Say that to my face and we will see if that holds true.
France was fighting wars, most of which it won, for 2000 years before your pathetic country was born.
Come to Paris and see if your fat American ass survives for one week in a typical neighborhood.
wachaufeuropa 1 year ago
Paris is more dangerous than any ghetto neighborhood un USA. Your not sissies that for sure. Is there a lot ethnic minorities in Paris/Marseilles/Brittany? Pershing supposedly was friends with Petain during WW1.
Salute for now mein friend!
RattlerBK 1 year ago
@griffy85b Yeah....no. lol
France was once a superpower when it came to military might. Many times throughout history, France waged wars both at home and abroad and many times came up victorious. Hell, they conquered much of Europe under Napoleon! Recently, yes, France has not been near the same militarily, all but losing to Prussia in 1870, and losing to Germany in 1914 and 1940, but to say they "don't have the balls to stand and fight" is grossly inaccurate.
Zornkatzu 1 year ago
@Zornkatzu
France won in 1914
MsObirah 1 year ago
@MsObirah Yes, you are correct. Not sure why I believed otherwise for a moment there. Perhaps I had meant to say that France COULD have lost without help from the rest of the Entente. Thank you for the correction.
Zornkatzu 1 year ago
@MsObirah
No France won in 1918. With the help of about 50 other nations.
Smalbop 1 year ago
@Smalbop France won this war not alone of course, with our allies, our friends (UK, US etc...). France paid this victory by 1 400 000 soldiers KIA during 5 long years, northern France devastated, occuped, looted. Don't forget that and I can say yes! France won this War!
nanssor 1 year ago
@nanssor
The German casualties were even higher by 50 %. This is because Germany had only half of its army in France, the other half destroyed the Russian empire in the meantime. Concerning destructions and casualties of the French you remind me not to forget them but I remind you not to forget that this was the first German attack in about 25 French-German wars, and after 1814-15 and 1870-71 only the 3rd of these wars which destroyed not alone German cities and killed German civilians...
Smalbop 1 year ago
Comment removed
sidddde11 1 year ago
@sidddde11 no, hitler wasnt a military genius. u know nothing of history. do u think hitler drew out these plans? u idiiots, hitler was the very reason why the germans didnt win the war in 1940. go look into if u give a shit.
rahulpower 1 year ago
lol French Fried.
krakowia88 1 year ago
@krakowia88 ahahahah ya halarious name to bad they didnt have napoleon to save em
garyU6969 1 year ago
@krakowia88 ahahaha! ur sooo fucking funny arnt ya!
rahulpower 1 year ago
This video forget to mention French covered the Allied retreat in Dunkirk/Dunkerque, also saying French didn't resist much is unexact. The soldiers fought well, but too many of our leaders screwed up too bad and there it goes.
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
I am a German and I agree with you. The French bore the brunt of the German invasion and many French units fought with valor. The French were abandoned by the English - just before the English sank the French fleet at Oran. Winners write history books and the French (unfortunately for them) are counted among the losers of WWII.
krautschmidt 1 year ago
@krautschmidt
They were taken in by the FILTHY BBC LIES!!! But did you ever hear anything about Churchill? With his cigars and his brandy, disgusting! He was a crap painter! Hitler. Now he was a painter. He could paint a whole apartment in 1 afternoon. 2 coats!
Fittykent 1 year ago
@Fittykent I guess I never thought of measuring the capacity of somone to lead a nation by their painting ability. Now that I have, I regret the waste of time.
krautschmidt 1 year ago
@krautschmidt I think that's a bit of a shortsighted comment. I wouldn't call the Evacuation of Dunkirk "abandoning" the French. The British offered aerial bombings of Germany, France declined. France could have struck first, they chose to sit and wait. While the sinking of the French fleet at Oran was at the very least controversial, Britain lost just about every piece of military hardware it had trying to save France, and had to take precautions since the Battle of Britain was about to begin.
Zornkatzu 1 year ago
@Zornkatzu Your right. I intended to say the British never made a serious effort to help defend Western Europe. 10 divisions - not sure if the Brits outnumbered the Belgians in that effort---. Britain was willing to fight to the last Frenchman, when that didn't work they decided to fight to the last Russian.
SaitoYoshida 1 year ago
@SaitoYoshida I suppose you make a good point, though if I were Churchill's Britain and staring down the barrel of Hitler's Germany, I would have focused on my home country's defenses as well. France lost miserably, but Britain knew that Germany was never, ever going to be able to defeat Russia head-on. So, they held their resolve and refused to give in, frustrating Hitler into (foolishly) attacking the mighty Soviet Red Army.
Zornkatzu 1 year ago
@Zornkatzu that's bullshit! even american and british generals thought that the soviet union would collapse within weeks...and it wasn't the brits who frustrated hitler to attacking the soviets, it was his plan ever since!
nightwish1000 1 year ago
@nightwish1000 Well of course their plan was to, ultimately, attack the Soviet Union. However, Hitler did not want a war on two fronts. They signed a deal with the Soviet Union and began sweeping across Western Europe. When they were unable to engage Operation Sea Lion and invade Britain, they became frustrated and unleashed Operation Barbarossa on the Soviet Union earlier than they had wanted. The might of the Soviet Union crushed the Germans come winter, and Britain had time to recover.
Zornkatzu 1 year ago
@Zornkatzu no that's not correct! operation barbarossa wasn't a consequence of the failure in britain! the germans needed fuel at that time and there is still the speculation that stalin could have attacked in the east at first! the battle of britain simply took too long and operation sea lion was first of all a menace for the brits to give up, even hitler knew that it was difficult to carry it out also that he couldn't have started his ideological soviet campaign either then!
nightwish1000 1 year ago
@nightwish1000 I'm afraid you may have misunderstood me. I didn't say Operation Barbarossa was BECAUSE of the successful defense of Britain. What I said was that Operation Barbarossa was engaged SOONER than Germany had wanted. Germany wanted the Western Front finished before opening the Eastern Front. When they were unable to defeat Britain, and thus complete the Western Front, they opened the Eastern Front anyway, thus starting a war on two fronts. This pretty much cost Germany the war.
Zornkatzu 1 year ago
@Zornkatzu germany could have beaten russia u know. the main reason they didnt was that their armies became bogged down in moscow and stalingdrad. u see, they panzer armies work well in open terrians but in a city, not so much.
rahulpower 1 year ago
@rahulpower
well also note that the Russians could replace their losses way easier than the Germans. The russians tank, were good, even if the panzers were better, and could be repaired easily.
Say if they lost 1200 tanks in a battle, in less than a week they would have repaired 900 of the damaged tanks.
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
@Zornkatzu i would call it abandoning the french actually, but the british had no other choice. they had to leave the french so that they would have some hope of winning the war in the long run.
rahulpower 1 year ago
@rahulpower I can see that point of view. To me, though, abandoning the French would have been to not have helped them at all *cough* USA *cough*.
Zornkatzu 1 year ago
My girlfriend is French-Canadian, but i must say, damn the French are stupid...that is all.
ShitList2010 2 years ago
generalizing sure makes you look intelligent.
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
it's pretty jacked up that hitler thought he could defeat the americans. these colors don't run!!
badassmexicandude 2 years ago
It wasn't just America, It was America, Russia, Britain, France, Poland, Canada, New Zealand, Greece, and various patisans and resistance groups against Germany.
So it was like 10 contries against Germany. Not very fair
Len1977gt 1 year ago
@Len1977gt i agree that it was every country making up the allied forces and not just the americans. didn't mean 2 take all the credit. however, without the backing of america, a victory over the nazis would have been less likely
badassmexicandude 1 year ago
hey man, I think you took my comment the wrong way, all I saying was Germany probably had one of the best armies in the world, and they were tough to defeat. It took alot of countries to defeat Germany, that is all.
Len1977gt 1 year ago
@Len1977gt sorry if i took it the wrong way didn't mean 2. most will agree that the germans were tough and fought bravely. however, i will say that the principles that they fought for (i.e., nazi values and beliefs under hitler's command) were seriously misplaced
badassmexicandude 1 year ago
Not very fair to the millions of people Germans and Soviets killed.
krakowia88 1 year ago
@Len1977gt yea but who started the war between germany and amerca? or the war between germany and russia? it was germany who provoked the war with france and britain too.and war not being fair? are u a fool?
rahulpower 1 year ago
god dam why they invade my country while theyre just going to france? damned hitler!
Deathkillazz 2 years ago
Geez...can't tell whether this so-called documentary was made for 12 year olds, or by a 12 year old. Maybe both. This puts Cliff Notes to shame.
splat4 2 years ago
What i am saying is not confusing. Not at all. The tea party movement is about restoring the United States back to the way the founding fathers intended the US to be. Now i have done my homework, research i'd like to call it on why the US government is so corrupt. Its more corrupt than you think it is. How ever Liberals have been going a smear campaign for quite some time now because their desperate to keep the Liberal agenda hidden and transparent. It sounds like to me that you are a Liberal.
ceocoryaald 2 years ago
The Germans probably had the best army In world war two. They lost due to fighting on too many fronts against too many country's and so were out numbered also allies had superior air capabilities and economy's to build planes and tanks faster.
Still their army was well trained. The Americans and Brits also had well trained army's but the Italians army was a joke probably one of the worst trained army's in the war
darkdestroyer34 2 years ago 2
french are pussies ... end of the topic
jonsson666 2 years ago
@jonsson666
One day a french will knock you out.
clemnewyorker 1 year ago
@clemnewyorker If any French person knocks me out, it will be a mickey some French Whore dropped in my drink.......
hopeurforfreedom 11 months ago
@hopeurforfreedom Im a American, My Father is Scandinavian ( Swedish ) and my mother is French, so I have Swedish and French. I can dumbell bench press 120 pounds, and sqaut 225 for 48 reps. So the French are not weak, my mothers maid name comes from Muscketeer origins.
nojokenygren 9 months ago
@nojokenygren You are American, not French. If you mother lives in America, she is American of French ancestry. I have German/Swiss/Swedish and Choctaw Indian ancestry, but I am 100% American.
hopeurforfreedom 9 months ago 2
France has turned into a country full of wine drinking cheese eating surrendering monkeys. They were absolutely victorious in the first world war. What made them the complete opposite between world wars i don't know. France got what is diserved from the Germans for the what the French did to Germany after WW1. The Treaty of Versailles crippled Germany for something the Germans didn't do. Germany only took a side in WW1 they were not responsible for it. So why make them pay for war damages.
ceocoryaald 2 years ago
french history is full of invasions ..they always think they are super power ..after invasions ,they use to leak english ass to be free
kosmowski1 2 years ago
No sir, go find a real history book and read it before insulting a Nation and its people.
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
today France will drop few nukes on germany and will be after conflict.
NaiIfaks 2 years ago
when germany took france over, we were so close to losing the war:(
Although the nazis were terrible and everything
there soldiers were well trained and much better than the french and british and soviets
nickas123 2 years ago
nah France never won any war
Strome88 2 years ago
i know, im saying we nearly lost the war to Germany
nickas123 2 years ago
No what about napoleon he won many wars and like hitler he had to be brought down by many countrys britain russia prussia etc.
jimmy27paul 2 years ago
a general who forgets to equipe his men with winter coats when going to 'siberia-land' isn't a great genius. Besides the world was divided with politicaland civil unrest, France was about only the country which was stable so Nap took advantage of that. Hitler had the British, Americans and soviets on his back yet he managed to conquor that stupid-ass country.
Strome88 2 years ago
Napoleon had the whole Europe against him, and USA giving monney to UK with the exclusive trade.
And France wasn't really stable, there was several rebellions from monarchist (Vendée)
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
@Kamfrenchie look just calm your patriotism down it makes you seem desparately jellous. the british empire was the strongest on earth then
fuckue1 1 year ago
What about the war to liberate USA from british oppressors? Jefferson and Washington recognized they couldn't have won without the French.
oh, 100 years war, all Charlemagne success, WW1 etc
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
what about the Cajus always loyal to France
UclaBruins22x 1 year ago
Excuse me but I don't know who are the Cajus. :S
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
ethnic group mainly living in Louisiana, consisting of the descendants of Acadian exiles
UclaBruins22x 1 year ago
I admit I never heard about them before.
That's a response to my post about Napoleon isn't it? Well I guess a part of US population was supporting France, but nevertheless, the US policy and the trade arrangement didn't make things easy for Napoleon and the French.
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
and germans: prussians and hessenians.
EDDGC 1 year ago
@Kamfrenchie charlemagne was german, when will u ever learn it!
nightwish1000 1 year ago
@nightwish1000
cool, could you justify a bit ? We are thaught that clovis, charles martel and Charlemagne were french, even if the franks originally came from germany.
I thought Charlemagne would have had way more german territories if he was german.
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
@Kamfrenchie first of all, in a strict historical sense, all of them were neither french nor german as both countries didn't exist, so the question of territory is obsolete! you can only argue by cultural background! clovis, charlemagne and also the royal court at paris spoke oldgerman for centuries! frankish doesn't mean french, you just kept the name! in fact the main part of germany was frankish under charlemagne!
nightwish1000 1 year ago
@nightwish1000
meh, sterile and endless debate spotted, I think both French and Germans can claim that Charlemagne was one of their king. So let's say he was both.
btw, nightwish a good band :)
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
@Kamfrenchie the origin of the difference between the French and Germans was founded by Julius Caesar.
When crossing the Rhine with his legions, he finds himself in an immense forest inhabited by bloodthirsty barbarians, so he decided to turn back.
That is what he noted in his memoirs.
In reality the Germans and the Gauls have a similar culture. Caesar has just decreed that the Gauls were causing enough problems to go look for others behind the Rhine.
DuguesclinBZH 1 year ago
@Strome88 Learn history. stay in your country and die there.
clemnewyorker 1 year ago
@clemnewyorker gladly lol
Strome88 9 months ago
lol sitkrieg
MrMukumLimbu 2 years ago
look at the powerof the blitzkreig
Gdsh22 2 years ago 2
But the germans them self had so many troops. The allies only have more troops because the alliance have so many nations.
1943TheSS 2 years ago
ngeesshh. its a summary already .
mikerama1 2 years ago
i love you joe
jebraidic 2 years ago
well Tmineff if you put it in that position mostly it was the Germans against the world since the Italians had a sucky army and the Japanese had much conquering to do on the East. It was sweet how the French got humiliated. Great Millitary tactics by the Germans and very weak resistance from the French.
lunaoscura808 2 years ago 2
100% right!!
liquidus2172 2 years ago
The French lost 100,000 soldiers in combat in May-June 1940, and shot down some 1,000 German airplanes. How can you call that a "weak resistance"?
AFAIK, your country (a you write from the US) stood cautiously neutral, while it had promised in 1919 to support France and Belgium, in case of Germany becoming warlike again.
Fridomfry 2 years ago 2
Mexico is my country not the US and yes i agree that the US stood neutral but the French did not fight like the Soviets where every single person demonstrated courage and fought till the last man. French military should have prepared since Germany was showing signs of aggression.
lunaoscura808 2 years ago
In every army, people and units showed courage, while others collapsed. Sometimes the same unit can fight heroically in a dozen battles, then throw in the towel. Remember that the Russians :
- Had abandoned their allies in 1917, with tragic consequences for all.
- Were allied with the Nazis until 1941.
- Surrendered in mass in 1941 and 1942, so that Hitler could even create a Russian army
The same nation fought heroically at Leningrad and Stalingrad.
Fridomfry 2 years ago
Russians had a history of victory and triumph. What separated the Russians from the Polish and French was their leader. Stalin was eager to win, especially with the oncoming Western Allied assistance, ready to relieve extreme pressure.
VindictivePhilosophy 2 years ago
Don't forget Stalin didn't care for the lives of his mens.
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
Yeah we didn't participate in WW2 *rolls eyes* lol
Strome88 2 years ago
Truly is a shame; the French's military prowess of the Napoleonic Era just couldn't last.
VindictivePhilosophy 2 years ago
It's not "a shame": The French military conquest of Europe was bound to reach an end, even with Napoleon's genious and the French military experience of that time. As you say, it just couldn't last against the major European powers allied. Basically, the revolution had destroyed the excellent French navy organized under Louis 16. Thus, England ruled the oceans. Sea powers always rule over land powers. Plus the destruction of the Grande Armee in Russia.
Fridomfry 2 years ago
But now air powers rules over sea powers.
Strome88 2 years ago
its a shame however that France didnt take action when it had no opposition
it could have been a key player in the war i know great kingdoms dont last forever and Napoleons France was not what it was once but u think they would take the opportunity to try to crush hitler while he was undefended instead of sitting n waiting
Subzzero93 2 years ago
yeah exactly I like the french too
It must be annoying how everytime someone brings up war they have to be reminded of their most devestating defeat in 1941
They had a pretty professional army with good tanks and artillery and were prepared to fight as hard as they did in WW1 , but they made a huge mistake.
TheProjektcc 2 years ago
They were not prepared for World War II-Though WW1 was entirely different when 2 came around the french,even there once machinery did not modernize like the Germans-they were not prepared-The Germans feared the French because of World War I but that soon was disspelled as well
Uncle65788 2 years ago
At that moment the French were still a super power in the world.
Kippenbestaan 2 years ago
They didn't react because Liberalism had already take over France like it is today. Between world war they turned into a bunch of surrendering monkeys. Yes they were a key player in ww2 with their French resitance force. Napoleon should have know better than to fuck around with Britain and Russia. His arrogance got the best of him. Today as a result of their liberal ways. France will be a muslim country by 2050 and the rest of Europe aswell.Modern Europe has sold it self to muslims and socialist
ceocoryaald 2 years ago
"they turned into a bunch of surrendering monkeys" wow Professor, you learn history from the Simpsons!
wozza2341 2 years ago
No surrendering monkeys is a racial slur i use toward the French because they are what they are. A bunch of cheese eating wine drinking arrogant surrendering monkeys. They can't find their ass home from the Rhine during WW2. By the way the Simpsons are fucking queer.
ceocoryaald 2 years ago
"By the way the Simpsons are fucking queer. " Then why do you quote the show word-for-word in a discussion about WW2? Is it true that Americans can't think for themselves, but have minds that are programmed by the television? It seems so. Best wishes my friend.
wozza2341 2 years ago
The TV is tool of mind control. If you do not limit your TV time soon that TV will control your everyday life. A TV is capable of manipulating and even worse brainwash the public. Just look at how Barack Obama became president. The world elites manipulating the public through TV to get Barack Obama elected. They did through every single news media network but Fox. Now fox is slightly bias too but to the right and not the far left. Some stuff they say is true and some isn't. Thats what a TV is.
ceocoryaald 2 years ago
lol. You're f***ing funny. You must be Jewish. Am I right?
wozza2341 2 years ago
No. I am Catholic. What i told you is true. To make a long story short. The future of the United States is uncertain. It is on the verge of becoming a police state. Like Nazi Germany was. Fema has camps that are fenced with barb wire. Obama's rise to power was during bad economic times. So did Hitler. Its only a matter of time before Obama starts killing off his opposition. The tea party movement is doing the right thing. If your not American research the tea party movement. Its interesting.
ceocoryaald 2 years ago
Well, the tea party movement is being coopted by the neo-nazi movement according to reports I have seen. So if you are a Catholic, you'd better do some homework before you go supporting them. But you really sound like a zionist Jew to me anyway. They always come up with f***ked up stuff like what you are saying to confuse people. :)
wozza2341 2 years ago
You're wrong. First you make generalization about people, then, Napoleon didn't fuck around with British and Russia, It was the British who supported all the coalitions made to invade France at that time. Napoleon mostly fought defensive wars.
And it isn't because of Liberalism French army failed. SImply, French become pacifists after the horror of WW1 since only their lands were ruined (plus Paris got bombed a few times), and they were using old tactics. Plus they had no sea to protect them.
Kamfrenchie 1 year ago
7:27, that is one happy Hitler
CineRecon 2 years ago