Why did the french army failed to modernize in world war 1 AND world war 2?

>The cavalries of the Central Powers, Germany and Austria–Hungary, faced the same problems with transport and the failure of tactics as the Russians.[41] Germany initially made extensive use of cavalry, including a lance-against-lance battle with the British in late 1914,[11] and an engagement between the British 1st Cavalry Brigade and the German 4th Cavalry Division in the lead-up to the First Battle of the Marne in September 1914. That battle ended "decidedly to the disadvantages of the German cavalry", partially due to the use of artillery by the accompanying British L Battery of horse artillery.[42] The Germans stopped using cavalry on the Western Front not long after the beginning of the war, in response to the Allied Forces' changing battle tactics, including more advanced weaponry.[41]
They were literally executing Napoleonic cavalry charge despite the lessons learned from observing the Crimean War and the American Civil War. If that's not charging the enemy like it's the 19th century, I don't know what your metric is but it's retarded.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horses_in_World_War_I#Continental_Europe

Where did the argument that the French were way behind in WWI come from?

It is correct but so was every other nation
>Germans using helmets not made from Steel
>British wearing caps
>French wearing caps and bright uniforms as if they were on parade
>All sides trying to charge machine guns and not knowing what the fuck to do

Is this just a form of wehrboo posting? Because the Germans were in no way superior to an extent where it would be an advantage.

The difference is that, initially, the French were also doing it with infantry. As in getting into a line and then walking towards entrenched German soldiers.

>the French were also doing it with infantry
EVERYONE WAS DOING IT WITH INFANTRY YOU IMBECILE

Shit I didn't know about it
Feels weird to imagine WW1 soldiers charging on horses.

Everyone was doing infantry charges, but only the French actually slowly marched in line during an attack.

If the french weren't behind then why did they got btfo by the germans until Verdun ?
All this time they were fighting on their soil, why made the germans superior then ?

Want to hear something weird? Cavalry charges occurred in WWII as well. I'm not even talking about that meme Polish charge either. Everyone was pulling out cavalry charges until mid 1942. The Soviets were doing it until the end of the war.

Pretty much every major battle was a French/British offensive before Verdun. The Germans wanted to bleed them dry so of course defense in 1914-18 is going to lead to the least amount of casualties.

Because the French are extremely arrogant. If you have ever been to France or read about French history you will quickly notice this.

They were a modern army in both conflicts.

That's not an excuse. If Defence was a more effective tactic then it should have been pursued. The Entente powers were the ones with time on their side, they had two fronts open and an active blockade.

Well it is an excuse.

The French were extremely autistic about having Germans on their soil, politicians wanted the Germans out ASAP as you can imagine.

As others have said in this thread I think they were pretty arrogant and more lax about taking casualties overall.

>The French were extremely autistic about having Germans on their soil

A soil made of coal, which on it were the majority of french mines, at a time where coal was very important.
It was a little more than a piece of land, even if there was indeed autism about it.

>First army to implement modern infiltration tactics
>One of the first armies launch large mechanized offensives
>First army to issue its troops with a light, easily portable machine gun in large numbers
>Behind

>French were behind
>what is Gallipoli

Lack of money and abundance of socialism

The Germans got BTFO by the French during the first battle of the Marne. It can incidentatly also be considered as the first motorised infantry has been used.

And? The Entente has access to the entire rest of the planet, the Axis had only access to their own countries and the entire plots of land they managed to seize from the Allies.

are you dumb? why would the French just give up the territory and have to import coal for the war effort when they could just mine it themselves ?

Because French offensives to retake their lost territories cost them millions of casualties you idiot.

Which You should note was vastly useless and underindustrialized at the time. America included.

US Army manuals from WWII give explicit steps on how exactly one should charge the enemy while firing his pistol.

It was actually those early engagements between cuirassiers still wearing their largely ceremonial armor that sparked the shift toward body/head armor for the infantry.

>That the panoply of the cuirassier was of considerable protective value is learned from several sources. If his headpiece or corselet were struck by a projectile, it deflected a bullet of high velocity if its angle of incidence were great (over sixty degrees to the normal), but in this case the bullet was apt to disintegrate completely, producing a "splash" which itself was capable of inflicting a dangerous wound. In one instance recorded, a cuirassier was nearly decapitated by a lead splash of this kind which passed upward over the border of his breastplate.

And even before the Adrian helmets were in production the French were toying with steel 'calottes' worn under the cap.

I don't get it. Who is firing a pistol in this scenario?

Regular infantry don't have pistols, unless they purchased it for their personal use, or taken one as a spoil of war. And on top of that it isn't a main weapon, so you would not in normal condition charge with one. It seems weird that somebody would spend his time writing a manual on how to use a pistol in a charge.

>first army to issue steel helmets
>used small group assault tactics as early as the First Battle of Champange
>prioritized artillery
>inflicted nearly as much damage on the German at Verdun despite major strategic disadvantages
>advised and armed AEF saving thousands of American lives

>behind

...

>Who is firing a pistol in this scenario?

The Cavalryman, on horseback.

kek it looks like they're trying to capture a time traveller

Pretty sure the Germans marched towards the British in closed rank columns during their first assault at the engagement at Mons. The second attempt they spread out more but the point still stands, it's easier to maneuver attacking infantry if they move in a close rank fashion. And everyone initially attacked like that, the only reason the French are more renowned for failure is their uniforms really needed adjustment where as British and Germans could make minor adjustments, they were the first nation to launch big attacks against Germany, and they suffered the most initially because of this.