Be France

>bailed out by their allies
Which allies? Britain couldnt field a proper army until 1916, Belgium was getting raped and Italy was busy getting into the meat grinder. They pushed the Germans alone at the Marne and held western front during the entire war.

The French military might begins with the Franco-Spanish war (1630es) and lasts until the the Concert of Europe

France before the Franco-Spanish war was a formidable kingdom but not as notable and powerful as it was in that period

>literally what? can someone explain this to me? where did this meme come from?
france didn't want to join the iraq war or something so the americans got butthurt

see: freedom fries

Fuck off frenchposter faggot

You also forgot Frances withdrawal from NATO in 1966

holy shit stop huffing memes m8
they've melted your brain

>Win the war
>haha it doesn't count silly frenchies :^)

t. lindybeige

not even, first part comes from
napoleonistyka.atspace.com/index.html

and second part comes from Erwin Rommel's "Infantry Attack!" (don't have source rn)

fucking autist

>if you need allies to win, then you don't really win
By that logic, Britain has literally NEVER won any war in Europe (unlike France that won many wars alone there)

>the french were on the victorious side but they didn't win shit
Top kek, France was easily the Entente nation that contributed the most
If you want a country that ended on the winning side without doing shit, look at Britain in the Napoleonuc Wars and WW2

WRONG
We Germans recognize that France was our main enemy during WW1
Verdun is widely seen as the worst battle of the war in Germany

It's self-important British scums who make posts like this one

Shitty exemple
In the siege your pic depicts, the French were so reluctant to surrender that Parisian civilians themselves resisted, even eating cats and rats once there was no food left, and eventually starting a Communist Free City at the end to avoid having to recognize the peace the French government had signed with Prussia

If you wanted an exemple of surrender monkey behavior in that war, you should have posted Sedan

Who knew the US government could so easily manipulate the opinion of their people
That same people that is always suspicious of conspiracies by said government...

This.

We told 'murrica "We won't do it and we strongly advise you, based on our personal experience, to not do it.", then they did it anyway mocking us for being "cowards" to get the public opinion on their side and now they are all crying because of it.

Serves you right, you should have listened you fucking idiots.

It's older than that though. "Surrender monkey" jokes go way back - I remember hearing family members make jokes about it in the 90's.

Pretty telling graph regarding public opinion in the US but I don't think it's directly related to the American image of the French as cowards. I'm positive it's older than the Iraq war.

In the anglosphere I'm pretty sure it's a meme caused by a generation of American and British GIs helping to liberate French cities in WWII and then spending the next 60 years muh dick-ing about French girls welcoming them to France in the traditional way.

Over the next 10 years as the last of the "Greatest Generation" aka the last WWII vets die, the "French are cowards xDD" meme will start to die with them.

Fellow American here

>It's older than that though. "Surrender monkey" jokes go way back - I remember hearing family members make jokes about it in the 90's.
Literal made up story with your family
The term was first invented in one Simpsons episode in the 90s, but no one knew about it until it was memed to death in 2003

>In the anglosphere I'm pretty sure it's a meme caused by a generation of American and British GIs helping to liberate French cities in WWII and then spending the next 60 years muh dick-ing about French girls welcoming them to France in the traditional way.
Our G.I.s liberated half Europe, yet the meme is onlt about France, so wrong explaination

>Over the next 10 years as the last of the "Greatest Generation" aka the last WWII vets die, the "French are cowards xDD" meme will start to die with them.
WW2 vets arent the ones spouting that meme all over the internet, cretin
They werent even the ones spouting it in the media during the 2003 crisis
You probably never met a vet before, but they know how war really is and thus arent prone to make dumb jokes about soldiers who surrendered (since often they themselves had comrades who ended up captured in a battle and sent to camps).
Only people who never knew war make these jokes

>nobody watches the Simpson's :^)

>meme's only about France
For your average Murican, Europe is comprised of Britain, France, Germany, maybe Italy and Spain, and a few other countries maybe. That's probably further than it goes for WWII knowledge.

>a bunch of worthless insults
you seem mad user
There's really nothing worse than a bunch of old timers (or their boomer kids) jerking each other off about how they saved the world I tell you hwhat

>For your average Murican, Europe is comprised of Britain, France, Germany, maybe Italy and Spain, and a few other countries maybe.
Wrong
I know about most European countries and I'm pretty sure most of us at least know about Belgium and the Netherlands

>There's really nothing worse than a bunch of old timers (or their boomer kids) jerking each other off about how they saved the world I tell you hwhat
t. never met a WW2 vet
My great grandfather was one, and I never heard him boast about his service or mock the French

>some random webpage
>a book by a shit-tier German general
great sources you got there m8

France lost every single war they fought in the 50s and 60s to try and retain their colonies.

they lost several key battles in Vietnam because they didn't bring heavy weapons and thought the communists didn't have any.

>held western front during the entire war.
Full retard

>be the smoothest motherfucker on the block
>fuck up once in front of everyone
>your image is now permanently tarnished and you'll be remember to the rest of your days like the retarded who did that retarded action

that's how things work, get used to it

Indeed the French got invaded but they pushed them back while the Germans immeditaly surrendered the instant the French troops took hold in Germany.

Ok...?

>France lost every single war they fought in the 50s and 60s to try and retain their colonies.

All the two of them?

still not seeing any arguments there friendo

it literally did, what the fuck are you talking about

Not even true, since France won the algerian war.

>to try and retain their colonies.
We (sadly) still have our colonies

Not even the British themselves believed that. There was actually a detailed series of records assembled for German casualties in the war by front sector. They show that in the first two years of the war (1914 to mid 1916) the French were basically hold the front on their own.

You want "arguments" about the bullshit you spouted there ?

Pic related is the 1814 battle of Paris
Looks like a costly invitation to me
And saying the French are cowards because they accepted Allied terms after being defeated in 1814 is like saying that Germans were cowards for accepting Allied terms in 1918

With such cancerous arguments, were you seriously expecting a debate?

I think you are the model retard that OP is talking about.

>autistic retard is an anime poster
gosh what an unexpected twist

france didn't actually win ww1. i've been to verdun, i know you guys care and stuff. but you just didn't win. if it was france vs. germany in the west, you would have been smashed in 1915. if there hadn't been an eastern front, the germans probably actually would have celebrated christmas in paris. they actually almost got through as was in 1914, it's still subject of debate if they hadn't transferred vital reserves to the east (which only arrived after the battles in prussia had already been won).

an increasingly large part of the fighting was done by the british. you were increasingly reliant on anglo money and money and manufacturing. by 1917 the french army was incapable of going toe-to-toe with the germans. the americans had to win the war for you, although the british blockade would have done the job eventually as well. as late as early 1918, after years of blockades, knocking out the russians, taking over more and more of the combat against italy and assisting the hopeless ottomans, the germans still almost got through.

the french suffered most of all western powers and fought bravely, but their equipment, leadership and doctrines weren't capable of winning the war. the german army of 1914 really WAS the best in the world.

as for the reputation: that's something that really has been brought to europe from the united states and it's solely based on ww2. unfair perhaps, but that's just the way it is. and france's performance in that war, given that it had a larger army and more tanks than germany, really was very poor.

>emperor captured
>both outnumbered french armies are surrounded and forced to surrender after hellish sieges
>Paris largely undefended but citizenry bravely resist and form government to opose peace.
So the French are actually badass? French have always fought bitterly (Algeria, Vietnam) unlike the Bongs who run away/give savages independence.

yeah wtf how dare he uses anime reaction images on an anime forum like wtf

you're forgetting quite a number of battles the british fought. numerically inferior to the british, yes, but it was the crucial difference. they held off hundreds of thousands of germans which france didn't have to fight. without the french, the british wouldn't have needed bother to land on the continent. the would've been no point in doing so. but without the british, very likely france would've exhausted itself much more in 1915 and wouldn't have held out through 1916.

also, naval blockade of germany and the dismemberment of german colonial empire.

also, britain financed the french war effort.

>>autistic retard makes assumptions and still after several posts has nothing smart to say at all
gee, too predictable

>if it was france vs. germany in the west, you would have been smashed in 1915.
Wrong
France basically held the Western Front alone until late 1916, so even if Britain hadnt joined, France wouldnt have lost any sooner than 1917

>if there hadn't been an eastern front, the germans probably actually would have celebrated christmas in paris.
True
I'm German myself, and think no one can deny that we were the strongest nation in that war
Doesnt change the fact that France is the nation that contributed the most on the Entente side
If they cannot be considered victors despite that, then no one can

>an increasingly large part of the fighting was done by the british
The British barely did shit at all until the end of the war
It always amazes me how English speaking media always focus on the British contribution in WW1 when here in Germany, it's France and Russia that are seen as having been our main foes in that war

>the french suffered most of all western powers and fought bravely, but their equipment, leadership and doctrines weren't capable of winning the war. the german army of 1914 really WAS the best in the world.
Exactly
We were the best in that war, and no country could have defeated us alone
Still, among the coalition that barely defeated us after a long war of attrition, France was the country that contributed the most

>without the french, the british wouldn't have needed bother to land on the continent. the would've been no point in doing so

Without the French, the British would've been unable to fight a land war at all (given that the British army was so weak that the German police would arrest them upon landing) and thus would have been absolutly powerless and unable to do any harm to Germany

All Britain could have done would have been a naval blockade that would have been rendered completly useless by the fact that, in absence of a land war with France, Germany would have easily been able to sustain itself without having to rely on export
It's the massive war of attrition on the French border that drained the ressources out of Germany and made the naval blockade effective

If the war had been only between Germany and Britain, it would have devolved into a weak embargo and the average German wouldn't even have noticed a war was occuring

>If the war had been only between Germany and Britain, it would have devolved into a weak embargo and the average German wouldn't even have noticed a war was occuring

neither would the average Brit desu

Can someone unironically explain what France contributed to either world war that wasn't "getting invaded"

Yep, pretty much
Unless the Germans got their shit together and built a real navy, but they've never been much of a seafaring nation so....

>thinking that the american civilians had any say in what wars we get in to
Smart presidents know that if the full heart of the people isn't going into the war, we will probably lose
Look at vietnam for example

In WW1

-Provided a Western Front and held it basically alone for half of the war
-Even after Brits (and then Americans) finally started to help them on the Western Front from late 1916 onwards, frogs still made up most of the troops and lead most of the offensives
-Supreme Allied Commander Foch lead the decisive offensive (in which more Americans than Brits fought) that won the war
-Equipped and trained AEF troops
-Invented machine-gun based aerial warfare
-Had the highest ranking Allied aerial ace
-Created the best tank of the war
-Greatly helped on the Balkans Theater

France was easily the most important Allied country in WW1

Now in WW2...well, I can't think of anything relevant they did aside from maybe saving the Brits at Dunkirk (but then again, it's not like Brits were very decisive in winning the war anyway, so that shouldnt really count)

France is Italy 2.0, progressively becoming less relevant over time.

I love how this pic conveniently skips WW1 and the French conquest of Vietnam in 1886 (as well as shitons of other wars) to just focus on the few defeats
When you know that France fought over 60 wars between 1850 and 2000 and only lost these four, it puts things into perspective

...

>we surrendered our capital to the germans but it doesn't matter because some commies didn't like it
nice damage control lmao

You don't spend the largest conflict in human history doing nothing and get to live it down.

This simply is not how historiography works.

>autistic retard doesn't know where he is

like i said, the british wouldn't have needed to bother to land. they would've been dealt with in an afternoon. it took them a while to get a decently sized army in the field, but to say they played no role until the somme just doesn't make sense.

nivelle offensive broke the french capability to lead when on the attack. from that moment on, british and/or americans had to provide majority of troops.

So like how Germany surrendered their capital in Seven Years War, Napoleonic Wars, and WW2.

they brought more guns and tanks to the field than the germans in 1940, which means they didn't do nothing. against all expectations, they were outmanoeuvred and outplayed.

yes
>b-but germany

You are trolling right?
The Imperial German Navy was the 2nd strongest navy in the world at the time and very nearly the equal of Britain.
Also German U-boats were very effective in the blockade.
Hell without France the Naval blockade probably would have been even more devastating

Not an Argument

They also were operating with outdated military models and got surrounded because of a surprise German manuever through the Ardennes. Not to mention the Brits were also completely and utterly BTFO by the Germans but the bongs had an island to flee to.
The French government was in exile and the country was occupied. Even then the French contributed to the Allied effort (Free French soldiers) and after the liberation of France they contributed over a million men for the invasion of Germany

>like i said, the british wouldn't have needed to bother to land. they would've been dealt with in an afternoon.
And given that they would have been powerless against Germany with just their navy, they would have been unable to do anything effective without the French

>it took them a while to get a decently sized army in the field, but to say they played no role until the somme just doesn't make sense.
It's the truth though
Do you really think the 50,000 Brits on the Western Front in 1914 were of any relevance when both France and Germany were fielding over 3 millions of troops each?

>from that moment on, british and/or americans had to provide majority of troops.

Only for a few months in 1917
By late 1917, the French were back to leading on the Western Front and in each of the 1918 offensive they were by far the ones fielding the most troops

Simple

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C-YSq5flow

>You don't spend the largest conflict in human history doing nothing and get to live it down.

Italy does it fine
Sure a few memesters on this website mock them, but you'll never see normies do it

Italy don't pretend to be good at war.

France cling to delusions of grandeur and insist on being perpetually more relevant than any other European country despite having been a continual embarrassment since 1815

>The Imperial German Navy was the 2nd strongest navy in the world at the time and very nearly the equal of Britain.
Numbers aint anything
The German navy had never been used and was very unexperienced
That's why the while navy got BTFO in one battle

>Hell without France the Naval blockade probably would have been even more devastating
Even with Germany isolated and the French front draining all their ressources, it took 4 fucking years before the naval bloackade started to have effects
If there had been no French front, the blockade would have been like a mosquito bite for Germany
And don't get me started on the scenario in which Germany and France are in good terms and exchange food
Britain was a weak powerless shithole and could never have came even remotely close from defeating Germany without allies

t. Lindybeige

The only people I see with "delusion of granduer" (what a weird pompous term, only a Brit would speak like that) here are Brits

t. lindybeige

>what a weird pompous term, only a Brit would speak like that

Are you a native English speaker?

Because I'm a burger and that's a pretty common term.

America did indeed win the War of 1812, but how is that related to this thread?

>Are you a native English speaker?

Nope, I'm German
But I've been speaking English fluently for years but I never came across this retarded term
Is "grandeur" even an English word? Since when do English words end in "eur"?

Its a French word, just like 50% of the English language, showing once again the grandeur and genius of France who generously spread the gift of her language to the Anglo-Saxon savages

America won the Great Patriotic War when Napoleon invaded? First time i hear that

>Italy don't pretend to be good at war.

Fuck off british faggot
We ARE good at war
Sure we may have fucked up in WW2, but we single-handedly annihilated the Austrian Empire in WW1 and Italian city-states repeatedly blown the shit out of Spain, France and the HRE during the Italian Wars
And don't get me started on the Roman Empire
The only reason we failed during WW2 was because of shitty commanders and Mussolini's retardation

not my post but i'll chime in:
- german navy was inferior, yes. minor point: british battlecruisers were shown to be shit.

- blockade had an effect long before that. parts of the german population was starving during the 16-17 winter and from at least mid-way through the war the english were much, much better provided for than the german troops at the front. just read ernst jünger. can't imagine what life was like for civilians, given the soldiers had it that bad.
also, on the latest scenario: if the germans and french hadn't gone to war, britain wouldn't have gone to war either. as is the british almost decided to wait this one out and it wasn't entirely clear whether the british would join in until quite late.

delusion of grandeur is a pretty well-known concept.
since the english started borrowing french words.

>single handly annihilated the Austrian Empire
haha, he says this referring to an Empire which was simultaneously fighting against the Russians, and at times the Romanians on the Eastern Front and which suffered 3.5 million casualties (1.2 million more than they suffered against the Italians) and on the Salonika front the Serbs, French, British, and Greeks.
even if you did the fact that you """"defeated"""" (with a huge amount of foreign assistance and allies) the Austro-Hungarians is irrelevant and pitiful, these are the same people who lost to the fucking Serbians

This song was made to celebrate the Rusian victory agaisnt Napoleon, pretty much when everything started going downhill for France.

single handedly

also, read what germans though of italians during either world war.

italians were fierce warriors for thousands of years, but in the 20th century they were crap. hey, i'm dutch, my country wasn't exacly impressive during the world wars either. but during the first one when we were probly stronger than during second one, at least we had the sense to stay out.

why did the italians join? because they were promised tiny pieces of land and some money. good cause, bro. the slaughter of 1914 was horrendous and they knew it. surely what they were promised was not going to be worth joining that war. they didn't have to join, they did, they performed badly. not your fault, still true.

>delusion of grandeur is a pretty well-known concept.

It's literally an expression originating in a pretentious 1930s feminist play user. Though to be fair, it was an American play, so is wrong.

t. literature student

Jutland showed the lethality of the Imperial Navy. Though it was unable to defeat the larger British fleet it inflicted more casualties and was potent.
>Blockade only affected end of war
Both blockades were pretty effective but with the advantage in material the British one was more effective.

>we ARE good at war

says the country whose defensive doctrine since 1871 has been "fall back, wait for allies to arrive, if none show up, peacefully surrender capital and set up collaborationist government"

>the anglos can't even tell the difference between Italy and France
I knew American education was bad but this is unusually bad even by their standards

i didn't know that. but it is often unironically used by historians.

Not as bad as the "get in at the end, pretend you did the heavy lifting" of the americans.

>implying there is a difference between one surrender monkey and the other

Germany would have conquered the UK in under a month if they were connected by land.
>inb4 that's just a scenario
The Brits got ran out of town by the Germans during the Battle of France.
>depend on allies to rescue
So like the Brits during WW2? Or what were you gonna land in Normandy by yourself?

Brits are so insanely obsessed with France they're just gonna spout anti-French shit even when replying to posts that have nothing to do with France

>The Brits got ran out of town by the Germans during the Battle of France.

If the French had done their fucking job there wouldn't have been a Battle of France

>implying there is a difference between an anglo and a monkey

This

>fall back, wait for allies to arrive

Yeah but in WW1, they had to wait two fucking years and millions of dead for Brits (who had officially entered the war one day after France) to finally arrive
No one knows what Brits were doing for all that time, rumors say they were enjoying beach vacations in Turkey

It was the British who betrayed the France constantly throughout the 1930s and who enabled the Germans to conquer Europe.
Lloyd George stated in the 1920s that they were concerned about the excessively strong Franco-Polish alliance and how to counter it.
Boy did the Anglos sure succeed there! At least we didn't have to worry about those vicious and overly powerful French and Poles conquering Europe!