Why do Yanks always bag the fighting ability of the French? (1 Viewer)

[theBaron]

Our Air Corps went through the same design evolution, too. It wasn't until we started getting data from combat that rifle-caliber machine guns were phased out of designs.

 

[Combat]

As someone who spent a month in Moscow last year on the 65th anniversary of the end of WWII, it put a different perspective on the war. The magnitude of those battles and suffering are almost unimaginable to anyone in the west. For example, more Russian soldiers died in the battle of Moscow (which they won!) than the Americans lost in the entire war. One battle. That doesn't minimize in any respect the bravery and sacrifice of Americans or British, but if you are discussing the collective sacrifices and bravery of a particular nation during the war, the Russians surpass them all many times over.

 

[Currahee Chris]

@Combat- I have always attributed that to the fact that jackboots were trouncing all over their country. I think if the US or England were in the same dire circumstance both nations would have bled themselves white to achieve victory- as the Soviets did.

 

[Mitch]

the russians are a whole thread to themselves in a discussion like this. The eastern front was probably more cruel and unforgiving than the far east everything I have read and been told from veterans was that it was horrendous and then some.

The russians bravery often gets mixed up with the absolute disregard for the lives of their men from the command structure and, the fact that they were probably more scared of their own security apparatus and the like than of any germans put in front of them.

Didn't the germans capture more russian prisoners during the war than allied casualties combined?? I cannot recal the exact numbers from memory but, I am sure thats right and many like german prisoners of the russians did not get home.
Mitch

 

[Rob]

@Combat- I have always attributed that to the fact that jackboots were trouncing all over their country. I think if the US or England were in the same dire circumstance both nations would have bled themselves white to achieve victory- as the Soviets did.

Aboslutely right mate, both countries would have fought to the last as well, its the type of people that generation were. Also if Germany had won the Battle of Britain and invaded, Russia would have been in a worse position with Germany in control of Britains military resources.

Rob

 

[lancer]

the russians are a whole thread to themselves in a discussion like this. The eastern front was probably more cruel and unforgiving than the far east everything I have read and been told from veterans was that it was horrendous and then some.

The russians bravery often gets mixed up with the absolute disregard for the lives of their men from the command structure and, the fact that they were probably more scared of their own security apparatus and the like than of any germans put in front of them.

Didn't the germans capture more russian prisoners during the war than allied casualties combined?? I cannot recal the exact numbers from memory but, I am sure thats right and many like german prisoners of the russians did not get home.
Mitch

Right you are Mitch. I remember reading some stats that stated that less than 10% of Russian POW's ever got home. The POW's, as "sub-humans" to the Germans, had no priority for food, shelter, etc. The Germans starved and worked them to death, if the POW ever even reached a prison camp. Summary executions of POW's were common place by both sides on the Eastern front. If a Russian survived captivity to return home, they were seen as "suspect" by the Russian security services. Many of them ended up in Gulags after their return to Russia. Talk about a rock and a hard place! -- Al

 

[Rob]

Right you are Mitch. I remember reading some stats that stated that less than 10% of Russian POW's ever got home. The POW's, as "sub-humans" to the Germans, had no priority for food, shelter, etc. The Germans starved and worked them to death, if the POW ever even reached a prison camp. Summary executions of POW's were common place by both sides on the Eastern front. If a Russian survived captivity to return home, they were seen as "suspect" by the Russian security services. Many of them ended up in Gulags after their return to Russia. Talk about a rock and a hard place! -- Al

The depths of human cruelty both the Germans and Russians sank to when treating each other has to be read to be believed, some of it is positively Japenese in its likeness. I'm very proud that the servicemen of my country didn't sink to these depths when treating prisoners of War, we and our American allies and Empire troops were simply a more humane kind of human being.

Rob

 

[gus macrae]

I was enjoying this discussion up to this point, English inventions, English bullets, English factories. I thought it was called the Battle of Britain

Interesting post though to avoid concrete for brians and neandethal responses I will limit response to a few of your points. I don't recal the US aid for the battle of britain what was that????? the spit and Hurri were not US all English inventions and won hands down with english bullets made in english factories so, thanks for the assist. From the imports from the US up until and shortly after the BOB I have seen we were as a country pretty much on our own in terms of what did start arriving later on. And, are you suggesting a battle between the US and UK navy and we bawked because we signed the treaty???? that my friend is a debate I would dearly like to have on here.

Just some points about the treaty: The basis was to avoid a war again as it was seen as a contributory factor between germany and the UK and, importantly, a worry on the US side about the anglo japanese alliances dating back to 1902 and other internal US issues.

The fact that the french went their own way is not IMO a positive at all what was their way?? build a defence line that was flawed and pants. Then failure from top to bottom eased germany to victory in WWII.

These are historical facts that are often embellished with terminology as surrender monkies and the like which, causes the problem of having a sensible debate about the french and their record in WWII. Its got nothing to do with how polite these people are for, as many are polite there is as many who are rude as in any country. That does not mean they are good or bad at fighting in the War that is being addressed.

Iam struggling to see when the french turn to combat when they do it properly?? The largest army on the continent was whofull in WWII and thats a fact I have not seen disproven by historians and military personal.
Mitch

 

[Mitch]

Do you as a scotsman call everything british??? I bet you don't I have relatives in the west of scotland and its always scottish this or that. Sorry to spoil your thread but, I am an Englishman and proud. I do think what I stated was factual.
Mitch

I was enjoying this discussion up to this point, English inventions, English bullets, English factories. I thought it was called the Battle of Britain

 

[Rob]

Do you as a scotsman call everything british??? I bet you don't I have relatives in the west of scotland and its always scottish this or that. Sorry to spoil your thread but, I am an Englishman and proud. I do think what I stated was factual.
Mitch

Yes, while of course it was called the Battle of Britain there can be no doubt that England took the brunt of the attack and it was over England that most of the confrontations happened. What happened in England saved Britain...win win!^&cool

Rob

 

[theBaron]

...I have relatives in the west of scotland and its always scottish this or that...

"Welcome t' All Things Scottish! 'Cos if it's not Scottish, IT'S CRAP!"

-Mike Myers, "All Things Scottish" on SNL

Prost!
Brad

 

[Mitch]

Ha Ha!!!
Mitch

"Welcome t' All Things Scottish! 'Cos if it's not Scottish, IT'S CRAP!"

-Mike Myers, "All Things Scottish" on SNL

Prost!
Brad

 

[MapleLeaf]

The French in the AWI were like the Prussians at Waterloo
They decided the faith of the war
I quess lots of Yanks don't know that

 

[Jay]

@Combat- I have always attributed that to the fact that jackboots were trouncing all over their country. I think if the US or England were in the same dire circumstance both nations would have bled themselves white to achieve victory- as the Soviets did.

There were an awful lot of French Resistance fighters who fought,and died. There were also an awful lot of innocent people murdered by Nazis as an example. Some political leaders felt that the best way to preserve France and the people was to go along. I suspect that there would have been, and still are, political leaders in many countries who would go along to save their own skins, but also to preserve their country.

 

[Scott]

It was pretty much the French fleet and French siege guns that won at Yorktown. The French had the courtesy to make Washington the star of the show at the surrender. Washington DID stand out so that was a given anyway.

 

[Scott]

There were an awful lot of French Resistance fighters who fought,and died. There were also an awful lot of innocent people murdered by Nazis as an example. Some political leaders felt that the best way to preserve France and the people was to go along. I suspect that there would have been, and still are, political leaders in many countries who would go along to save their own skins, but also to preserve their country.

You have some high profile French that "went along" like Edith Piaf, Coco Chanel, and Maurice Chevalier. Piaf was supposed to have aided in prisoner escapes by having her picture taken with individual French POWS and given to them as souvenirs. The prisoner then cut out his face to make a fake passport. Sounds good.

 

[Rutledge]

You have some high profile French that "went along" like Edith Piaf, Coco Chanel, and Maurice Chevalier. Piaf was supposed to have aided in prisoner escapes by having her picture taken with individual French POWS and given to them as souvenirs. The prisoner then cut out his face to make a fake passport. Sounds good.

There will always be individual stories of defiance, courage, etc. But I think we are talking about the French/France as a whole.

The above, after all, was AFTER the French had, in essence, surrendered their entire country to the Germans. And without really much of a fight, quite frankly. They may still have been reeling from WWI. But I dont see the US ever doing that to a foreign invader.

Dont forget their Maginot Line. It was the foundation of French defenses, and ended up being a total joke. May not speak to their courage, but it did to their (lack of) combat readiness.

Some would argue the French are in danger of losing a cultural war now with their huge immigrant population. Im not bringing it up for discussion here, just pointing it out that that view exists.

 

[lancer]

Need to remember what WW1 did to France. When war started, France had population of approx. 35 million, Germany almost twice that. By the time of "victory", France had suffered 1.5 million dead, with over another 3.5 million injured and disabled. That is 1 in every 7 of total population, by far the highest percentage of the major belligerents. Because of the casualties and cost in terms of economics (much of northern France was devastated and would take years to recover), plus the common border with Germany, France could not afford to fight another war like WW1. They chose the route they thought would give them the best chance to win by killing Germans and saving French lives, the Maginot Line. The Line did, in fact, do what it was designed to do, up to a point. The Germans were forced to develop a way to avoid the Line and they thus exposed the fatal flaw in the Line, the fact that the Line did not cover the whole French border. Because the French could not politically isolate Belgium,(and because of the huge extra cost) the Line had not been extended the length of the border with Belgium. The Germans just went around the Line. The Line did put up some tough resistence in spots. Still, the most important factor in French defeat was the hangover from the huge losses in WW1 and the spector of further losses in 1940. The French were just plain worn out on a physical level (population has never really recovered from the WW1 losses) and on a morale level, not being able to face another prolonged fight. France, put really simply, shot it's bolt in WW1. -- Al

 

[jules118]

Need to remember what WW1 did to France. When war started, France had population of approx. 35 million, Germany almost twice that. By the time of "victory", France had suffered 1.5 million dead, with over another 3.5 million injured and disabled. That is 1 in every 7 of total population, by far the highest percentage of the major belligerents. Because of the casualties and cost in terms of economics (much of northern France was devastated and would take years to recover), plus the common border with Germany, France could not afford to fight another war like WW1. They chose the route they thought would give them the best chance to win by killing Germans and saving French lives, the Maginot Line. The Line did, in fact, do what it was designed to do, up to a point. The Germans were forced to develop a way to avoid the Line and they thus exposed the fatal flaw in the Line, the fact that the Line did not cover the whole French border. Because the French could not politically isolate Belgium,(and because of the huge extra cost) the Line had not been extended the length of the border with Belgium. The Germans just went around the Line. The Line did put up some tough resistence in spots. Still, the most important factor in French defeat was the hangover from the huge losses in WW1 and the spector of further losses in 1940. The French were just plain worn out on a physical level (population has never really recovered from the WW1 losses) and on a morale level, not being able to face another prolonged fight. France, put really simply, shot it's bolt in WW1. -- Al

Well stated. I think that too many people here are either unaware of those stats (France had suffered 1.5 million dead, with over another 3.5 million injured and disabled. That is 1 in every 7 of total population) and are maybe unable to comprehend the effect that had... and for what? What did the victory in 1918 bring to France, did the years between 1918 and 1939 bear fruits that made it seem like the human and economic cost of the 1914 - 18 war was worthwhile and worth risking again? I'd suggest not.

I can well understand how the French leadership thought it better to avoid the same happening again, when the scars had not even begun to heal. It's easy for us to look back through the prism of history and criticize, particularly when we can't even really begin to comprehend the horror that they had just endured. It's often those with the least experience who are most unflinching in their belief that they 'know' what ought to have been done.

 

[lancer]

Well stated. I think that too many people here are either unaware of those stats (France had suffered 1.5 million dead, with over another 3.5 million injured and disabled. That is 1 in every 7 of total population) and are maybe unable to comprehend the effect that had... and for what? What did the victory in 1918 bring to France, did the years between 1918 and 1939 bear fruits that made it seem like the human and economic cost of the 1914 - 18 war was worthwhile and worth risking again? I'd suggest not.

I can well understand how the French leadership thought it better to avoid the same happening again, when the scars had not even begun to heal. It's easy for us to look back through the prism of history and criticize, particularly when we can't even really begin to comprehend the horror that they had just endured. It's often those with the least experience who are most unflinching in their belief that they 'know' what ought to have been done.

Agreed. Simple arithmetic to compare French WW1 losses projected to today's US population would be like the US fought a war that cost 50 million casualties, with 17 million of those KIA. This is a staggering number and percentage. Just totally impossible to grasp, unless one is Russian, from WW2. How could France possibly have been the same dynamic country after such losses, that it was in 1914? -- Al