Fri Nov 14, 2003 6:11 am by [NN]Crossbow
In reply to Nukelt/Post #3:
(Sorry for the rant, but I have a real gripe with the public
promotion of inaccurate history. Best regards, Eric)
"200 years" takes us back to 1803, a time when Napoleon ( only the single greatest military leader in our western history ) was alive and well. Even during World War I, the French neither surrendered, were conquered, nor in ANY way betrayed their allies. If anything, the courageous conduct of French troops on the battlefield during the Great War ( "My men are starved for ammunition, my right flank has collapsed... what can I do? I attack!! Attack!! Attack!!" ) was enough to lessen the already terrible burden on the allied powers.
It should not be forgotten that America was very late to enter this war, and later still to enter World War II. Even in the Second War, France was not completely defeated. Whilst the capital fell and Nazi Germany more or less occupied the country, the most radical elements of the French political spectrum formed a government in exile and continued to combat the German invaders both through domestic guerilla resistance and through open warfare in North Africa. Were it not for the intelligence, logistical support, and acts of sabotage carried out by these so-called "conquered" French, D-Day and the subsequent defeat of Nazi Germany would have been an utter impossibility.
France had no choice in the matter of entering World Wars I and II. In the thick of it from beginning to end, French citizens fought with ferocity and suffered terrible losses against the more powerful German army whilst America sat and contemplated its priorities. It would only be in response to a direct attack upon its own strategic interests that America would ultimately enter these conflicts.
In the dilemma of entering these struggles, however, America's unusual practice of discretion was understandible. Everybody KNEW that Hitler had weapons - Just look at American policy toward Iraq vs. that towards North Korea now.
Even after World War II, the French continued to fight victorious battles in North Africa and South East Asia ( Korea, Suez, Vietnam, Iraq I, various Peacekeeping efforts ). Had the Cold War escalated into open combat, the French military would have also been the single largest one-nation, land-connected force to stand in the path of Soviet expansion. Thus, during the first hours of a hypothetical World War III, the hopes of the world would have again rested on the shoulders of courageous Frenchmen.
These things said, any suggestion of French military ineptness crumbles at the feet of this long and proud history of French military brilliance. America, renowned for allowing its overzealous, frankly juvenille sense of pride to distort historical truth (just look at recent Mel Gibson movies), must come to realize that fact perserveres even in the face of such overwhelming ignorance ( i.e., "fact does not cease to exist because it is ignored" ). Without such moral lessons learnt, the political character of America will continue to be that of a spoiled child; one who interprets every disagreement or refussal of its needs as a moral injustice: one to be met with force.
SIDE NOTE: French Canadian militias also defeated American troops directly in numerous battles during the War of 1812 and the Fenian Uprising. In addition, the entire strategy behind the American War of Independence depended on the success of a naval blockade ( to prevent the delivery of British reinforcements ) which only the French could provide. Hence, the American Revolution was not successful because of strategic brilliance on their part, but because the French prevented the English from delivering additional troops to finish the traitors off. Were it not for the French military, the United States would not exist.
Modern American history books seem to conveniently forget that aspect of the American Revolution, just as they rarely contain anything more than a foot note on the War of 1812: A war which America, for reasons beyond logical explanation, claims it won ( America attempted to conquer Canada whilst the British were occupied fighting Napoleon, but the Canadians drove them back. In my eyes, the failure of American forces to meet even one of their objectives equals defeat on their part ) .
Edited by - [NNCrossbow on 21-11-2003 04:11:18
