England vs France

>Because France wasn't the primary belligerent of the war

Neither was Britain/England in most of the "British" victories listed (Italian War of 1521-26, Nine Years War, Seven Years War, Peninsular War, Sixth Coalition...)

And, unlike Britain in the Sixth Coalition for exemple, France was the 2nd most important nation of the winning side and was decisive to victory in the American Revolutionary War

You really shouldn't have made that "argument" because, given that Britain has literally never won a war against another european power by itself (unlike France), it can only end up being turned against you

>It was an American victory
If it had not been for the help of France and Spain, the United States would have lost. This is a fact so do not start doing mental flips.

I wasn't personally making that argument, might have been. I do believe though that most of these shouldn't be on the list, at least in their current state, as they are misleading. That is including most of the British victories listed, I'm not some anglo revisionist.

Irrelevant.

Here's what is left if we count only the "1vs1" wars

And even then, the "French and Indian War" shouldn't be counted as it was part of a larger war in Europe, during which Britain's ally (Prussia) was diverting most of France's attention from North America

It wasn't, seeEngland literally loses all continental territory to France

this list is stupid.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_invasion_of_Normandy_(1202–1204)

>France invades France while England complains
What the fuck is this

They got rid of the most violent types from their shires, their aristocracy (which was French) got an extended trip in their ancestral homeland...etc

Normandy was the fief of the english king, like anjou and aquitaine.

...

More like an ancestral homeland than a "fief"
England was the fief

The war was about Gascony, England loose Gascony to France.

There is no debate.

>Napoleonic War split up into the Seven coalitions and the Peninsular war
>Hundred Years' War is only counted as one even though there are at least three seperate wars there seperated by peace

Gee, I oùonder who could be behind zis article

exact.

>lose majority of mainland holdings
>lost mainland allies like burgundy
>"our aristocracy" which was largely french/norman to begin with
British nationalists are insufferable because they can never accept a defeat, they'll twist and turn anything into a tactical or moral victory

Your a fief

Dunkirk

Why are you so humorless

>he was only pretending to be retarded
Lindybeige was 100% serious and you know it

>Battle of random Veeky Forums thread
>Result: Decisive English victory
>British casualties: None
>Johnny Foreigner casualties: Sense of humor killed, one butt wounded

Yet another British tactical victory :)

Haters will call this a meme

>Italian Wars
>England

WE

Arabs must be tamed by the BAC

The war was fought over the crown of France and the treaty of Troyes recognized Henry V and any of his sons as the rightful heirs of France.

Yeah, but they never actually got it because Henry V died and France rejected Henry VI

>France rejected Henry VI
Doesn't matter, according to the treaty Henry VI was the rightful king of France. Charles VII was a usurper.

>treaty of Troyes

Irrelevant
War ended with the Treaty of Picquigny

Don't forget the United Provinces.
We wuz reluvunt.

>A treaty finally settling the dynastic dispute that has been going on for 3 generations
>irrelevant
Also
>The Hundred Years' War was one continuous war with only one end.

I thought they only provided financial support but never actively participated