EAT NEW PAGE

I gave ya a chance...

Two things:

1) tesb did a job worthy of the bible. He was ready to go all Old Testament on your asses.

2) It's amazing the shit you miss when you get busy. Well, Syneptus, you are in charge. In honor of your rulership...

you got shut down...

I dont really care enough. You can be king again this time.

*bows*

I still wont bow

that's ok

it's not too late to shine his shoes...

I don't shine shoes

not even my own

Well, so neither do I...

though technically I am suppose to for work

be a rebel

I am, though my boss tries to constantly reign me in

well, um... start a ryat....

sorry, I am half-asleep.

I am going to bed now...

me too, good night heretics

-Exiled Possum, Servant of Draakjacht who is the Lord of the Page 251, may his reign strike terror in the hearts of his enemies

To tesb

Aww, that's not nice. He was a good minion. Damned French people and them thinking they're so big.

Wait, didn't they get their asses repeatedly kicked? Except the French Revolution, I think they won that one.

Well when you study history, they gave a good accounting for themselves for much of their existence from the Frank tribes against the Romans (though they eventually lost, the Romans saw much potential in them for soldiers) on up to WWI. I feel that WWI was the begin of the end for the French soldier for though they stopped the Germans cold (the British at that time of 1914 was a small force that could only cover a small area, the French did most of the fighting in that year against the Germans) they lost so many of their troops with a fighting spirit that after that war was over they no longer wished to fight. Hence when the Germans came around in 1940 the French army was a shadow of its former self and was useless. Ironically though this did kick start the French fighting spirit in the form of partisian action and had limited use in certain battlefields but it is still limited to a few areas of French life and is no longer in their core nature like it used to be.

The French are too introverted...

True, though Americans can be the same way. In fact before WWI they rarely were ever involved with world politics unless it directly affected them. And even after WWI they attempted to leave the world to its own devises and refused to be part of the League of Nations (the predecessor of the United Nations).

Yes it is true. At one time, the United States of America was not the worlds policeman.

I know we were isolationsists, but the French often avoid even their own problems in their own backyard. And didn't Germany kick their asses in the Franco-Prussian War, not only creating solidarity amongst the Germanic city-states, but also starting the trend for the French to lose or meet a stalemate at best? After all, the French held the line in WWI, not win it.

Of course, Napoleon kicked some butt, but he also mismanaged most things after the army moved on and made quite a few strategic and tactical errors the like of which I didn't see again until Hitler lost his mind (i.e. invading Russia and using wrong equipment in wrong conditions). I can see why he ultimately folded in on himself.

Some truth to what you say, though a lot of those issues could be due to poor leadership (ex. it was a French General that developed the idea of Blitzkrieg but was never implemented by the higher ups). This explains why the Romans were able to conquer the Franks (early French) and then use them successfully in later campaigns as well as why the French never truly could dominate the world in was that Roman, German, and British were able to. At one time they made great soldiers and had the occasional leader that could do something (Napoleon as you noted), but after WWI they seemed to go into a decline that they were never able to get out of as regards soldier quality.

I dunno. I see what you say (but would push it back to Franco-Prussian War), but at the same time feel that the French have always been behind in a technological mindset (note that I do not discount other groups falling into this trend). For example, during the Hundred Years War, the French undervalued the strength of longbowmen and relied heavily on heavy cavalry, while the combination of English longbow and lighter cavalry tore it up in the field. Come the American Civil War, Europe had a chance to take note of what industry could contribute to war, but failed to do so for the most part. The French fell on this especially hard, not meeting the German focus on military equipment and losing the Franco-Prussian War. With WWI, they held the line, but fell into the same Cult of the Offensive which all other European nations did and fell back on it again in WWII, when the Germans moved ahead in their equipment development. It wasn't just the number of men which caused the Maginot Line to falter, but also the French insistence that countering new tanks would not be necessary, although it required little more than a wider trench.

The Napoleonic Wars saw them doing a little better, but it was the British that saw the promise of snipers and artillery defending formations. The column was Napoleon's biggest advantage, but that alone was limited and he was incapable of moving past it.

Just my thoughts.

and they are some good thoughts, the technological mindset is a big issue for example the French at the start of WWII had the best tanks in the world but refused to use them in a way that would make best use of them

Are you sure it was WWII? Not so much doubting you, but the French really had little chance to do squat (something about surrendering does that) and I remember touring the French Military History Museum in Paris, noting that it stopped right after WWI. Funny that.

Yes, I remember the comment because of the author of the book (can't remember the name) mentioned that specific irony. The French had the best tanks available but due their inability to use them properly (basically use them to support troops and not as a mailed fist in the essence of the Blitzkrieg) and so were often deployed in groups of 2 to 3 versus the Germans which sent entire company of tanks at key areas. Later on in WWII the Panther and the Tiger (which along side the T-34, many consider to be the best tanks of WWII) were developed giving the Germans the edge in tank warfare.

Oh yeah, the Germans definitely jumped ahead in quality, but they could only produce a small fraction of what the U.S. could (understandably) and so eventually caved to sheer numbers. What I really think gave the Germans the upper hand in tank warfare was 1) the use of bazookas by allied forces, where the projectile failed to cause armor penetration and thus was useless, and 2) the use of anti-air artillery by Rommel in North Africa. Once 88s were shown to grant superior firepower with surface use, the refitting of tanks to incorporate such a powerful round was a wise choice.

the french tanks were indeed  much heavier (not necessarily better) then german tanks. often german tanks could not even penetrate the french tanks. the 88 was first used in against french tanks because of this. the french also had more tanks then the germans. the difference was that france used tanks as infantry support and not as a fast spearhead like the germans. (i.e. they were not amassed, but spread out through their army)

the concept of using tanks like the germans did was invented by the english btw and later in the 20ties this concept was put to the test by a joint german-russian maneuvers. (all before the war)

the correct use of tanks was often the critical factor of the german strength and not necessarily the quality or quantity of them (this is defiantly true up until barbarossa).

-Exiled Possum, Servant of Draakjacht who is the Lord of the Page 251, may his reign strike terror in the hearts of his enemies