In a study about historical knowledge conducted in a prestigious american university, the following question was asked to the students (amongst other historical questions)
Did France won or lost the First World War ?
19% answered "Don't know"
14% answered "Won"
67% answered "Lost".
What. The. Hell.
Other urls found in this thread:
[citation needed]
Well in reality France pretty much lost. Versailles was a show trial and the country still fell apart a few years later.
>the country still fell apart a few years later.
What are you talking about ? France was one of the country the least affected by the economical crisis. They lost demography but still had the numbers against Germans (with british help) at the start of WW2.
It is almost as horrible as French people thinking they saved Europe from Nazi Germany
the Seven Years War was the first world war, and France lost it
>prestigious American university
>won
arguably the first world war was the one that came after the French revolution, and they won that one. And the one that came immediately after that. And then Napoleon went around kicking peoples shit in for a while until Waterloo, then everyone called reset.
I'm translating (badly) from a french article
>the Seven Years War was the first world war
Akshually, it was the War of the Spanish Succession
Women don't know shit about history, I blame them and the absolute STATE of high school education in America
Also you gotta take into account all the foreign students that go to top American unis especially Asians who idk probably don't study much about wars that are irrelevant to them (for the most part)
what about vietnam war?
The one you lost ?
what? im from yurop (not even a frog)
but curious to know what they answer about that
ww1 can be ignorance, but vietnam is full on denial
Can confirm, knew a woman who thought Hitler was Russian and the US fought the Russians in WW2.
evidence please?
>Also you gotta take into account all the foreign students that go to top American unis especially Asians who idk probably don't study much about wars that are irrelevant to them (for the most part)
Sorta this, there's this 1 Asian dude I know who tohught Leningrad and Stalingrad were the same city
Pyrrhic victory.
they did a wonderful job in setting up ww2 and their defeat tho
>muh wimmiz
I think it has more to do with the meme "We saved Europe in both WWs" that Americans keep spouting all the time
People who don't study history get their knowledge from pop culture
Don't you realise? WOMZ~ are responsible for all of the bad things
>until Waterloo
>ignoring fiasco that was Russian campaign
I am not even touching on centuries-old argument about Borodino (I consider it tactical victory for France), but you can't say he kept kicking everyone's ass, since he lost fucking Paris to Russians and got BTFO from his Empire to an island.
True. The should have either dismantled Germany or be lenient with it.
I am French and I don't know if we can call that victory. We lost too much blood, a quarter of our country was in ruins and some places are still so full of bullets that we break chainsaw when cutting trees, even today we still find old chemical shells.
The cost in blood and money was so high for just Alsace and Loraine that it don't feel like victory. We are not the imperial guard.
>Napoleon raped everyone until he lost his army to the weather in Russia
There, I fixed it
>they
You mean, the Soviets and the Brits?
Yet another fascinating historical discussion.
You should be congratulated for your contribution to this board.
That's not the point tho
By "lost", they don't mean "it was costly" or "it was a pyrrhic victory"
They mean "France was defeated, surrendered and America liberated them", because that's what pop culture tells them happened in both WWs
>le Russians are immune to cold
Or
>le French didn't know that Russia is a cold place
Choose your poison.
Seriously though, why do we have to resort to pol-tier mems all the time? Wars are a bit more complex than that, no matter which side you are sympathetic towards.
>Soviets set up French defeat in WWII
>During the Russian Civil War
I don't quite understand you. Or do you think that Brits and Russkies helped Hitler to steamroll France in '40?
In 38, the situation was clear: the big danger was Soviet Russia and the only thing between us and the Soviets was Germany. Because of the Soviets, we had to go easy on the Germans, we even cancelled the successful invasion of Germany when the troops were busy in Pooland. I do not even mention the fact that the Soviet teamed with the enemy.
Or do you think that Brits helped Hitler to steamroll France in '40?
Yes. There is a movie about it:
youtube.com
The frogs and the bongs lost WW1, they're just too retarded to accept that, even today. If they'd just kept clear of that conflict, they would both have been better off.
poilu chan a cute
Even if you count WW2, they still won in the end after getting back on their feet again. Just because you surrendered doesn't mean you can't fight again (wasn't some anti-Napoopan coalition members like that?). It is more correct to say that France lost the Battle of France but won WW2.
Shit, didn't mean to quote OP.
>No source
the soviet union was in no place to invade anything after their losses in poland