What new lie about France is going to be spread now? Fucking hell

>Dunkirk

Boring. At least make it about Case Red

unless you've read the script stop moaning already, christ

What the hell are you talking about? The Brits were the ones who fled, neither the French nor the Germans surrendered to them.

This. Apperently, there are already Dunkirk movies from 1958 and 1964 as well as a TV series from 2004. It's redundant to make another movie about the same shit. There's probably nothing about Case Red even though such a movie could convey an interesting atmosphere.

I heard they tried to make a movie about the fall of France but there was only enough material for half an hour of film.

>historys most evil villain

Expect heavy revisionism for that movie The whole Dunkirk episode was basically British soldiers getting evacuated while French troops held the Germans back
Can't show that to the Anglo audience though, so they'll have to make up fictious British heroism

For those interested by the real Dunkirk, here's a video that summarize the whole event very accurately:
youtube.com/watch?v=w6C5P-AYGdY

Nolan has always made entertaining films. So I'm gunna roll a joint and watch it at the drive in and enjoy it.

>surrender

Well France surrendered but after being beaten.

Nonsense. The Miracle of Dunkirk was about brave old Blighty rescuing huge numbers of trapped French, Belgian and British soldiers by plucky derring-do with every boat they could get their hands on while British fighters fought in the skies.

>that account

>French Military Victories
>The French Kings of England
>England, Colony of France
>Epic French History !

Got a teeny feeling that guy may be a bit bias in favour of the French

it shows how the cowardly brits ran away

this. Us french fought to the very fucking end in the war, while the eternal anglo ran like a coward.

ONLY TOMMIES REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeee

t. Burger MacBeefin

Well, try to find something wrong in the video
He only presented verifiable facts

Let's not go full retard either, Pierre, may we?
You French surrendered like cowards while Brits ran away like cowards.
The only moment you showed bravery was when saving the Brits at Dunkirk

Now what's unfair is that your cowardice in that war is well known while the one of the Brits isnt
You can even see Brits on the internet having the guts to mock the French for WW2, which is insane considering how they fared in that conflict

t. objective German guy

>t. objective German guy

WAS CHURCHILL JUST COVERING HIS ASS?

Maybe not, seems pretty based.

Whatcha think Veeky Forums?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkirk_evacuation#Analysis

>In France, the unilateral British decision to evacuate through Dunkirk rather than counter-attack to the south, and the perceived preference of the Royal Navy for evacuating British forces at the expense of the French, led to some bitter resentment.

>According to Churchill, French Admiral François Darlan originally ordered that the British forces should receive preference, but on 31 May, he intervened at a meeting in Paris to order that the evacuation should proceed on equal terms and that the British would form the rearguard.[105] In fact, the 35,000 men who finally surrendered after covering the final evacuations were mostly French soldiers of 2nd Light Mechanized Division and the 68th Infantry Division.[106][107] Their resistance allowed the evacuation effort to be extended to 4 June, on which date another 26,175 Frenchmen were transported to England.[64]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dunkirk#Evacuation

> In the nine days from 27 May–4 June, 338,226 men escaped, including 139,997 French, Polish, and Belgian troops, together with a small number of Dutch soldiers, aboard 861 vessels (of which 243 were sunk during the operation).

>The last of the British Army left on 3 June, and at 10:50, Tennant signalled Ramsay to say "Operation completed. Returning to Dover." However, Churchill insisted on coming back for the French, so the Royal Navy returned on 4 June in an attempt to rescue as many as possible of the French rearguard. Over 26,000 French soldiers were evacuated on that last day, but between 30,000 and 40,000 more were left behind and forced to surrender to the Germans.[39]

>However, Churchill insisted on coming back for the French

that is all anglo bullshit

us french saved your coward asses, churchill was a fat moron

>Although Churchill had promised the French that the British would cover their escape, on the ground it was the French who held the line while the last remaining British soldiers were evacuated.
>Enduring concentrated German artillery fire and Luftwaffe strafing and bombs, the French stood their ground.
>On 2 June (the day the last of the British units embarked onto the ships),[Notes 2] the French began to fall back slowly, and by 3 June the Germans were about two miles (3 km) from Dunkirk.
>The night of 3 June was the last night of evacuations. At 10:20 on 4 June, the Germans hoisted the swastika over the docks from which so many British and French troops had escaped under their noses.[35][36][37]

Tl;dr: The French took care of holding the Germans while British troops were getting evacuated
Then, after all Brits got evacuated, some of the French were hastly evacuated as well during the little remaining time

Will there ever be a thread involving discussion of the Battle of France with actual good historical discussion or will they always be a handful of decent posts dotted around in a sea of /int/ retardation and parroted myths?

> 92,000 French soldiers killed in action in a month
> 3,000 British soldiers killed in action in a month

Brits were heroic, Frogs were spineless cowards: it sums up many British "historians"

t. not a French

fuck off you anglo cuck

stfu french faggot

liberals and libertarians cling to WWII because it is all that they have to promote their doctrine.

One of my favourite images to trigger *nglos when they claim they defeated Germany

You entirely miss the point, no Brit historian claims what you are saying.

Dunkirk isn't remembered has being a heroic military action. It was a humiliation for the army.

It's remembered because hundreds of Brit civilians showed up in everything from tug boats to fishing boats to life boats to speedboats to evacuate the British Army and hundreds of thousands of stinky baguette eaters while under air attack from ze Luftewaffe.

t. Eternal Frank

>some

Over 100,000 were

Half the civilian boats were French, and some were even Dutch

I was taught that Hitler let Brits escape at Dunkirk since he wanted good relations. Veeky Forums seem to disagree. Can somebody explain why do you believe it is incorrect, and why does general public think it is correct?

>half the civilian boats were French.

According to a Youtube account belonging to "theCajun Cutthroat".

It's true a small number were Belgian and Dutch though.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_ships_of_Dunkirk

There is a lot of debate over that. Some historians maintain that Hitler let the Allies escape but most of the evidence seems to point that the Germans halted to consolidate their position and didn't even contemplate that vast numbers of civilian craft would be mobilised to whisk the allies away before they could be crushed so that's the general consensus.

Which you want to believe is up to you, it's a matter of opinion. I can't be arsed to argue either way. I'm just answering your question.

It's a shitty myth
The truth is that the halt wasnt ordered by Hitler but by a general and the goal wasnt to let the British escape but to avoid overextended supply lines

The myth of "Hitler admired Brits so he let them escape" was invented by some British naziboo long after the war to make it seem that the nazis he admired so much admired his country too

>when saving the Brits at Dunkirk
Hard to save anyone when they weren't under threat in the first place.

In every nazi map, Brits are Aryan and Hitler in some speeches sounded at least neutral, if not positive towards the Brits.

It didn't have to be about admiration, just about pure logic. British were still one of the most powerful empire in the world and alliance with them would almost instantly give Hitler global domination.

So they ran away out of pure cowardice tather than cowardice and survival instinct?

>British were still one of the most powerful empire in the world

They truly werent
This myth died as soon as WW1 started and gave the proof that the collection of irrelevant shitholes Britain ruled there and there didnt even permit them to equal the military might of a lone Central European country

Neither. A tactical retreat to come back and fight isn't cowardice. On the contrary, it's a show of initiative. German armor was under orders to halt either way, not out of mercy as many Wehraboos will claim, but to preserve manpower and armor for Case Red while the Luftwaffe sank as many British ships as they could and let's be frank, it was a god damn turkey shoot. There's a reason most of the losses at Dunkirk were in the channel and not on land.

Tell us more about your knowledge of WW1 and history in general.

Everyone's dying to hear the opinion of someone who doesn't even know what countries were in WW1.

People like you are why Veeky Forums is a failed board.

France is a muslim shithole, i hope Russia will nuke us and end our suffering.

t. french

During the first phase of the Battle of France, Hitler was always paranoid about flank attacks into his rapidly advancing mobile units so he ordered them to halt at several occasions to enable the infantry to catch up. The same happened before Dunkirk, however, that halt order is generally regarded as a mistake because there was no real threat of a flank attack.

t. objective German guy, your objectivity doesn't cover your lack of objective education. For instance, you certainly did not know that the Luftwaffe lost more planes in France than over England (and the channel of course) eventhough the Battle of France lasted twice less than the Battle of England. You certainly do not know about the battle of Hannut, where the mighty German tanks, with the support of the mighty German Luftwaffe and the mighty German artillery, lost the first tank battle in history to French tanks in numerical inferiority. You certainly do not know the sacrifices of the Free French Forces, the Resistance, and even the civilians. You probably do not even know about Bir Hakeim.

My ancestors did not "surrendered like cowards". My ancestors trusted the Savior of Verdun to bring France ina desperate situation to victory once more (which was possible whatever you may say, but at huge cost), while this arsehole used the opportunity to access power and settle his own little fascist dictatorship for himself. Even in 1944 the French were not opposed to Petain, Hans. Even in 1944. While only 20% supported Laval and the collaboration, Pétain still had 80% of the population behind him. We were betrayed. The day after this faggot got to power, he reached out to the Germans for the armistice. And you motherfucker blame the whole French people for it? Do you really want to start such a game, Hans?

ps: you can call me Pierre actually, despite me not being the one you responded to in the first place.

>80% of the people supported him
>he unilaterally collaborated with Germany
Pick one and only one.

80% of the people were still behind him at the end of the war is what I said. Thus I do not fully comprehend your rhetoric. Please develop.

If the people are behind him and his actions, it's not a betrayal and his actions weren't unilateral.

Hi Pierre, I'm going to call you Pierre even though I'm not the objective German guy.

The Germans lost 2,233 planes in the Battle of France and 1,977 in the Battle of Britain so nowhere near twice as many.

Furthermore a large proportion of the planes lost in the Battle of Britain would have been big strategic bombers resembling a much greater loss of manpower and resources than fighters shot down in dogfighting in France.

Of course some of the planes lost by the Germans in the Battle of France would have been shot down by the Brits rather than the French anyway. The Germans lost over 100 planes to the RAF while trying to attack Dunkirk during the evacuation.

Are you completely retarded or just illiterate ?

" While only 20% supported Laval and the collaboration, Pétain still had 80% of the population behind him."

I did say people were behind him. But they did not want to see his actions as his. What the fuck can't you understand in this dozen words for Christ's sake?

>Driving
>whilst high
Your brain should tell you only one is the viable option

Sure I'm guessing your 'german' ancestors emigrated from Alsace and Loraine to America

>Are you completely retarded or just illiterate ?
I could ask you the same question since you can't read English and can barely type it.

>I did say people were behind him. But they did not want to see his actions as his. What the fuck can't you understand in this dozen words for Christ's sake?
What can't you? The people were behind Petain. You can't just meme and say "Well, they agreed with this because they plugged their ears and screamed loudly when told not to." If the people agree with the action, it's not a betrayal. It became a betrayal under the Free France administration and their revisionism.

Can anyone translate this to French for me so the frog can understand?

>A tactical retreat to come back and fight isn't cowardice

If you come back, indeed
But if you hide for 4 years until Daddy USA arrives...

My numbers are 1059 in BoF and 1052 in BoE. Which correlates more to the number of airmen prisoners fallen over France, the French government did not trust the Brits with (about a thousand, with bombers having more than the pilot in it). However, again my words are misinterpreted. I'm sorry about my level of communication in English as it seems to be lacking. I simply said the BoF lasted twice less than the BoE. 2 months VS 4 months. I do believe that's what's written up there...

Also.. "big strategic bombers"? In 1940's Luftwaffe ? How many classes did you miss every day? Come on, it did not have any "big strategic bomber", and to many that is the reason they lost BoE, because bireactors (the biggest they had) would be more vulnerable to everything, even the light armament of 12.7 mm Brownings Spits and Hurricanes were equipped with in 1940. Also, what the Brits really shot down were Stukas (completely useless at this stage of the war), and that the French did not shot enough in France.

>Of course some of the planes lost by the Germans in the Battle of France would have been shot down by the Brits rather than the French anyway. The Germans lost over 100 planes to the RAF while trying to attack Dunkirk during the evacuation.

I see you kept the best for the end. That is, of course, undeniable. Still my point is that the French fought, and the Battle of France should not be as overlooked as it generally is to the BoE.

What were they going to do? Repeatedly throw themselves against a numerically superior force until they had nothing left? They weren't suicidal. They came back with reinforcements.

>There's a reason most of the losses at Dunkirk were in the channel and not on land.

The British losses maybe, mostly because the British didnt take part in the fight to hold back the Germans during the evacuation
The French lost thousands of men in that fight around Dunkirk

hey guys im burger whats going on here

Casualties on land: 11,000 killed, 30,000 captured
Deaths of those in the channel: 68,000
So yeah, no.

I'll use simple words, it's best for both of us.
Collaboration was supported up to 20% of the French people. Collaboration is an action of Pétain but this was not known before after the war (history vs journalism blabla). The French did not want to believe it was Pétain's order and rather gave "credit" to Laval. They could then still believe in Pétain while condemning collaboration. Do you still miss something? (also nobody reads you anyway so don't pretend you're on some kind of stage).

>Well, they agreed with this because they plugged their ears and screamed loudly when told not to

You clearly do not realize the power of propaganda. That's weird for someone giving a bit of his money to the Queen every month. I would think you'd know a tale or two.
google.fr/search?q=propagande pétain&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjBpvqYgq3OAhXGfxoKHRc0CG4Q_AUICCgB&biw=2400&bih=1194&dpr=0.8
The people did not agree with the actions. You have several examples of it but really I don't intend to do the research for you atm.

The two shitholes that got BTFO by Germany in 1940 are arguing

>Glorifying cockroaches abandoning their ally

French casualties on land: 10,000 dead
British casualties on land: 1,000 dead

French casualties on sea: 7,000 dead
British casualties on sea: 61,000 dead

Basically, most Brits died as cowards while fleeing while most French died heroically while covering the escape

Instead they made saving private ryan which is almost completely fictional.

Covering his ass you both say. I think I agree.
>us french saved your coward asses
Calm the fuck down Frenchie I'm an Amerifat

Try fucking decaf bro

It's not like it's the first time Brits did that
In 1795, British faggots also fled the continent before French advance, abandonning their Dutch and German allies to the invaders

In 1940 they did the same except the roles were reversed (German invaders, French allies)

Brits literally say : the miracle of dunkirk

So fucking what?

America only fucking exists because of the French.

Let's go Veeky Forums pull your shit together

Let's have an actual historical discussion

All this /b/ tier bullshit with the MUH ETERNAL ANGLO and MUH FRENCH VALOR and MUH SURRENDER MONKEYS is some seriously pathetic crap.

Calm the fuck down Pierre and have a fucking Xanax.

Y'all got Medical Marijuana over there?

Jayzus fucking Christ calm the fuck down before you have a stroke.

recently the meme that French tanks and aircraft were so superior to the German wehrmacht was pretty popular.

Also people arguing that France could have single-handedly invaded germany instead of agreeing to the Munich treaties

>I'M A FUCKING HUGE INTERNET TOUGH GUY AND I WILL FUCKING FIGHT YOU ALL WITHOUT READING ANYTHING YOU WRITE

They evacuated with their allies as success was impossible. That's literally what the passage says.

Alright. Were there any british indian soldiers there?

I was reading a book about India's contribution to WW2, and I read something like the first time the brits went on a successful victory was with the indians in italian east africa.

1.) That doesn't refute anything I've stated thus far.
2.) Your frogness is showing, monsieur.

Poo in the loo

According the the objective YouTube account "FrenchSupremacy" the English all started crying as soon as they saw the enemy, and wanted to run away ASAP.

Sounds pretty accurate to me

Shitpost in the Reddit.

Why are WWII movies either

>le ebil nazis get defeated by the heroic anglos
or
>le ebil japs who eat babies get defeated by the heoric anglos

It's the same thing every time. Why don't they give us something new and more interesting? For example, a movie about the Japanese who went to China to fight the imperialistic ambitions of their own country or a movie about Azad Hind and how the British caused the Burma Famine?

>For example, a movie about the Japanese who went to China to fight the imperialistic ambitions of their own country
Several of those exist in both Japanese and Chinese. You don't hear about them because no one gives a shit.

No one gives a shit because western cinema makes people think that every Japanese person at that time was "ready kill themselves for le emperor :DD". When in reality, most people were just trying to survive in Japan and many were even against the empire. It's propaganda and you know it.

More like no one gives a shit because they aren't fucking Japanese or Chinese. It's the same reason you don't get movies in English about fucking Denmark or fucking Poland in WWII. No one cares.

The French fought like lions to the very start of the war.

Krauts should be reminded that they ruined Europe

The Nazis were Saturday morning cartoon villains bro.

But le etheral anglo ruined their effort

>Not having a drive in theater like 5 minutes away
I don't even have to bring my car

>historys most evil villain
nice mim

Maybe you cucks should start making your own movies then. Of course the eternal anglo is going to portray himself as hero.

We did
It depicts the French as disillusioned fuckers who just wait for the end while doing dumb shit (like raping civilians) and Brits as cowardly fucks who refuse to take the French with them

youtube.com/watch?v=vq2zvHcQvyc