The french military

[Shadedredd]

Considering the French are causing a rift in NATO, I thought it might be useful to look at what the french military have achieved in its history:

-----------------------------------------------------------
The total history of the french military ....


-- Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

-- Hundred Years War - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman.

-- Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.

-- Wars of Religion - France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots.

-- Thirty Years War - France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

-- War of Devolution - Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

-- The Dutch War - Tied.

-- War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War - Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.

-- War of the Spanish Succession - Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.

-- American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as de Gaulle Syndrome, and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; France only wins when America does most of the fighting.

-- French Revolution - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

-- The Napoleonic Wars - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

-- The Franco-Prussian War - Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

-- World War I - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States and Britain. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her Fraulein. Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

-- World War II - Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

-- War in Indochina - Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu.

-- Algerian Rebellion - Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; We can always beat the French. This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.

-- War on Terrorism - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.

Classic Quote:

Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion. -- Donald Rumsfeld.
http://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/warrior1.gifhttp://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Mytext.gifhttp://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/warrior2.gif

[ErikJansen]

I.. eh.. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[some_totalwar_dude]

Well at least you they kicked some ass under Napoleon. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

But don't be worried, the Dutch haven't kicked ass on there one since the 17e century. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

[jayrock]

absolutely classic...lol. personaly i would hope it wasnt that bad... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

oh man i got to send this to my friend jacque he's french canadian lol

[BDC]

lol, you missed out Napoleon but that is ok because it was obviously a fluke, powered by a control-freak who hardly slept, and lost ultimatly anyway. So true. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif *passes onto French cousins* http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

*EDIT* ok you did put Napoleon in http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[chilling]

Laughs.


Ooops, was I laughing at the French again.

[Teutonic Knight]

Quote[/b] (jayrock @ Feb. 19 2003,16:13)]absolutely classic...lol. personaly i would hope it wasnt that bad... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

oh man i got to send this to my friend jacque he's french canadian lol
oh my god Jay, you really have been spamming in my abscence did you pick an avatar that looks like you?

[Shadedredd]

I did not miss napolean.. :

read:

- The Napoleonic Wars - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

we are referring to Wellington here http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Knight_Yellow]

oh dear thats a pretty bad record aint it.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Foreign Devil]

Very informative. Although to be fair, the French were key in helping us to win the revolution.

Oh, and you neglected to mention the French and Indian war, which, incedentally, the French lost. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Shadedredd]

Quote[/b] ]Oh, and you neglected to mention the French and Indian war, which, incedentally, the French lost

do you mean the indo-china wars?


Quote[/b] ]-- War in Indochina - Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif




Quote[/b] ] Although to be fair, the French were key in helping us to win the revolution.


-- American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as de Gaulle Syndrome, and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; France only wins when America does most of the fighting. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif


http://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/warrior1.gifhttp://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Mytext.gifhttp://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/warrior2.gif

[jayrock]

Quote[/b] (Shadedredd @ Feb. 19 2003,15:56)]
Quote[/b] ]Oh, and you neglected to mention the French and Indian war, which, incedentally, the French lost

do you mean the indo-china wars?


Quote[/b] ]-- War in Indochina - Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif




Quote[/b] ] Although to be fair, the French were key in helping us to win the revolution.


-- American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as de Gaulle Syndrome, and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; France only wins when America does most of the fighting. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif


http://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/warrior1.gifhttp://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Mytext.gifhttp://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/warrior2.gif
no indo china wars, shortly before the revolution, they were fighting it out with britain for control of the colonies over here, both sides recruites indians to help fight on their side. since the french started it , it was called the french-indian wars... thats what im assuming he meant.

[Shadedredd]

Quote[/b] ]Oh, and you neglected to mention the French and Indian war, which, incedentally, the French lost

Ahh...the French and indian wars...No, I did not forget:


Quote[/b] ]-- War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War - Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.

[Foreign Devil]

Note to self- read posts more clearly.


Although I do tend to lose my place when I laugh. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[_Martyr_]

Hey they gave the world croissantes
Won the world cup & European Championships
Crusades (not that they were a good thing):p
Crimean war
Sacked Rome
Charlamange took over most of Europe
They gave us frogs legs not to mention snails
Where would we send all our bohemian poets if it werent for Paris?
What would you have instead of the Statue of Liberty?
There most likely wouldnt be a USA if it wasnt for the French Navy
Who would have given the USA its first loans?
Who was the first to recognise the USA as a nation?
Who made all the other European powers recognise the USA as an independant State??
You forget that the battle of Hastings was won by a French Norman man
English nobility is infact French

If you selectively pick all the bad things about a country, then any nation looks real bad http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[chilling]

And these are meant to be good things? I don't see your point http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[_Martyr_]

Yeah the USA thing was pretty bad http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

How can we forgive the french http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Wellington]

Quote[/b] (some_totalwar_dude @ Feb. 19 2003,14:59)]Well at least you they kicked some ass under Napoleon. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

But don't be worried, the Dutch haven't kicked ass on there one since the 17e century. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif
Even then it was'nt the Dutch who 'kicked arse'. It was the mercenaries (mainly Protestants) whom Marauice of Nassau relied heavily upon.

In 1603 the Dutch army consisted of -

- 43 English companies (3 regiments)
- 32 French companies (2 regiments)
- 20 Scot's companies
- 11 Walloon companies
- 9 German companies
- 17 Dutch companies

In other words only 13% (THIRTEEN PERCENT&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif of the army was Dutch.

Not much potential for 'arse kicking' there

What DID 'kick arse' was Maurice's reforms of the Dutch army - absolutely brilliant.

(Source - George Gush - Renaissance Armies (1480-1650)
ISBN 0-85059-604-1)

[Wellington]

Shadedredd,

You missed a catagory

Between 1960 and 1975 the French OAS made at least 6 attempts to assassinate De Gaul.

All attempts failed http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

Seems like French terrorists are pretty incompetent also

[Havok]

well shadedredd,

I need your mailing address.... cause im gonna send you the bill for my new keyboard im gonna have to buy tommarrow.

Cause after reading your posti laughed so hard i spit soda all over my keyboard and now its broken http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

Now i have to use my 10 year old Back-up keyboard till i can get to the store. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

Funniest dam thing i've heard in a long time http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Obex]

Hey Shadedredd,

Thats freakin hilarious Its nice to see a little good natured ridicule of the french. And what is best is that its all true. Its not name calling (someone recently referred to them as cheese eating surrender monkeys), stereotyping, or an insult to their politics (well maybe a little at the end). Just facts.

Your list does seem to make you wonder how they controlled so much of europe though. My political science class seems to indicate that they were relatively wealthy, and could afford to hire lots if foreign mercs to do their fighting.

I see you list your location as germany. are you a native? whats your take on the current french-german support of hussein?

[Wellington]

Quote[/b] (Obex @ Feb. 19 2003,21:52)]

Quote[/b] ]My political science class seems to indicate that they were relatively wealthy, and could afford to hire lots if foreign mercs to do their fighting.


Nope, that was the Dutch and, to a lesser extent the Swedes, although during the Renaissance (Italian Wars up to the 30 Years War) many countries recruited mercenaries (especially Swiss and Lansknechts) in large numbers.

Unfortunately the French have only themselves to blame.

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (Shadedredd @ Feb. 19 2003,12:59)]Considering the French are causing a rift in NATO, I thought it might be useful to look at what the french military have achieved in its history:

-----------------------------------------------------------
The total history of the french military ....


-- Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

-- Hundred Years War - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman.

-- Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.

-- Wars of Religion - France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots.

-- Thirty Years War - France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

-- War of Devolution - Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

-- The Dutch War - Tied.

-- War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War - Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.

-- War of the Spanish Succession - Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.

-- American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as de Gaulle Syndrome, and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; France only wins when America does most of the fighting.

-- French Revolution - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

-- The Napoleonic Wars - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

-- The Franco-Prussian War - Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

-- World War I - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States and Britain. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her Fraulein. Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

-- World War II - Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

-- War in Indochina - Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu.

-- Algerian Rebellion - Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; We can always beat the French. This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.

-- War on Terrorism - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.

Classic Quote:

Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion. -- Donald Rumsfeld.
http://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/warrior1.gifhttp://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Mytext.gifhttp://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/warrior2.gif
Funny post but its not really accurate. Some of the wars listed as defeats, France actually won.
It also leaves out some other wars that France won. You don't become one of the world's top powers without winning a few wars.

Charles Martel's victory over the Moors...saved Christian Europe from Islamic domination.
The First Crusade,the vast majority of the crusaders were French.
Also the Conquest of England by William the conquerer.

Side note: The victories and defeats of the Gauls don't really count as French military history. The Gauls no longer exist as a people.(modern day French are a mixture of Gaul, Roman, Frankish, and in the case of Normans, also Viking)

[Obex]

Actually, the majority of european nations used mercs, especially during the 15th to 17th century, a critical era for european state development. Larger, more powerful nations like france, spain, and great britain tried to limit their reliance on foreign mercs by keeping their generals in place while hiring regiments and companies of mercs. Smaller state, however, frequently rented whole armies, from generals on down.

The french also had a large porportion of their galley-fleet hired from private companies (like the Knights of Malta).

Swiss mercs were world famous, and highly prized. Interestingly enough, the Battle of Marignano in 1515 between the french and italians was fought by opposing swiss merc armies, who mutually destroyed each other. The merc system in europe didnt really decline until napoleon.

sorry, didnt mean to sound preachy.

[Obex]

You cant really call the conquest of William the conqueror a french victory. the normans were viking stock who had located in what is now northern france. to credit the french with the victory because the attack originated from what is now french soil is not right. to credit the french with the victory based on genealogical roots could just as easily give the victory to the norwegians, or the english.


Quote[/b] ]You don't become one of the world's top powers without winning a few wars

You are right here.

[Wellington]

Quote[/b] (Obex @ Feb. 19 2003,22:29)]sorry, didnt mean to sound preachy.
Not at all http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

I agree with you.

The only point I was adding to your original post was that the French, throughout this period, relied far less on mercenaries than many other European nations.

Therefore, yet again, they only have themselves to blame http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Obex]

Quote[/b] ]Therefore, yet again, they only have themselves to blame

Sounds like something to see on a tombstone.

A new national slogan? who knows.

[ICantSpellDawg]

excellent post

[CleverClothe]

Quote[/b] (_Martyr_ @ Feb. 19 2003,19:29)]Hey they gave the world croissantes
I do believe that croissantes were an Austrian development.

See this quote from Dictionary.com (though I can't remember where I learned this, this definitely isn't it):

French croissant was used to translate German Hörnchen, the name given by the Viennese to this pastry, which was first baked in 1689 to commemorate the raising of the siege of Vienna by the Turks, whose symbol was the crescent.

[Wellington]

Quote[/b] (CleverClothe @ Feb. 20 2003,00:37)]

Quote[/b] ]I do believe that croissantes were an Austrian development.

I can believe that. Such a culinary delight could not possibly have been invented by such a nation of incompetents.

But, please don't tell me snails and frogs legs were introduced by other nationalities. I rather choose to think the French were solely responsible for such culinary jokes

[Knight_Yellow]

france is about as major a power nowdays as britian is. ie. not very mutch.

he left out agincourt http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

and he he 20 scotts companies not bad consiting our population was 20 times smaller than every1 elses

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Brutal DLX]

You guys sure are lucky that the French members of this community aren't here. If I were French I wouldn't find it so hilarious, even though the French actually know what humour and satire is, contrary to some others....

[Teutonic Knight]

Quote[/b] (Brutal DLX @ Feb. 20 2003,04:03)]You guys sure are lucky that the French members of this community aren't here. If I were French I wouldn't find it so hilarious, even though the French actually know what humour and satire is, contrary to some others....
hey it really doesn't matter what you say to a Frenchman Brutal, they'll take as a de@dly offense and either veto you, kill you, or surrender to you..........

[Knight_Yellow]

Tuetonic edit that

they'll take as a de@dly offense and either veto you, kill you, or surrender to you..........

it should be

they'll take as a deadly offence and either veto you, kill u, surrender to u or insult the quality of ur homelands meat products

[A.Saturnus]

You forgot about the Flemish Rebellion. The French knights managed to be defeated by peasants and militia in Kortrijk 1302. The first time in history a knight-army lost to a all non-knight army. Although they took revenge 1382.

[some_totalwar_dude]

Quote[/b] (Wellington @ Feb. 19 2003,20:12)]In other words only 13% (THIRTEEN PERCENT&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif of the army was Dutch.

Not much potential for 'arse kicking' there

What DID 'kick arse' was Maurice's reforms of the Dutch army - absolutely brilliant.

(Source - George Gush - Renaissance Armies (1480-1650)
ISBN 0-85059-604-1)
your probely right.

Would you be so friendly to give me some more info where I can buy books about 16th-18th century warfare. I'd like to learn some more about it.

thanks

ps. please don't blame me for using the terme 'kick arse'
I'm only 15

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[JANOSIK007]

The truth of the matter is that if not for France U.S.A. wouldn't exist and we wouldn't be making fun of the French.

Ironic isn't it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif .

[JANOSIK007]

This whole topic started because French didn't want to attack Iraq with the U.S.. Am I right?

So preety much most of you are for the war.
I just would like to know why.

[Wellington]

Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 20 2003,22:52)]This whole topic started because French didn't want to attack Iraq with the U.S.. Am I right?

So preety much most of you are for the war.
I just would like to know why.
Eh

People who enjoy French joke = People who want to see dead Iraqis

Er .. thats some pretty weird logic Janos

[Gregoshi]

Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 20 2003,22:52)]This whole topic started because French didn't want to attack Iraq with the U.S.. Am I right?

So preety much most of you are for the war.
I just would like to know why.
That is being discussed in another thread. See the Irag/Nuke thread. That will keep you reading for a day or two. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

This thread is a humourous look at French military history. Some seem to have missed the humour part. As with most humour, one must stretch the truth to (plausibly) to make the joke.

And I do suspect you are right that current events inspired the post, but I wouldn't be surprised if the source material (assuming it is not original) dates back a number of years...recycling is a wonderful thing. France happens to be in the spotlight at the moment. I'm sure we could dig up some stuff for just about any military in the world.

[A.Saturnus]

Quote[/b] ]
France happens to be in the spotlight at the moment. I'm sure we could dig up some stuff for just about any military in the world.


Yeah, what about the oh-so-prized Japanese? What did they do in their military history? They invaded Okinawa and were severely beaten by America. The rest is fighting each other. Just compare this to the Mongols

[Knight_Yellow]

the mongols where good fighters but since they wherent out to make an empire there eventual demise was long over due.

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (A.Saturnus @ Feb. 21 2003,05:03)]
Quote[/b] ]
France happens to be in the spotlight at the moment. I'm sure we could dig up some stuff for just about any military in the world.


Yeah, what about the oh-so-prized Japanese? What did they do in their military history? They invaded Okinawa and were severely beaten by America. The rest is fighting each other. Just compare this to the Mongols
Japan beat the Koreans, and also the Chinese(in Korea) during different periods in their history. They also beat the Russians in 1905.

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 20 2003,22:42)]The truth of the matter is that if not for France U.S.A. wouldn't exist and we wouldn't be making fun of the French.

Ironic isn't it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif .
True, but France wouldn't exist without the U.S. either. They'd be speaking German right now.

[Brutal DLX]

No, they wouldn't. Perhaps only as a second language...

[Friedrich]

Some nice advice for American travelers to France... don't take it too seriously though http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

France.....what a country


The following advisory for American travelers heading for France was compiled from information provided by the US State
Department, the Central Intelligence Agency, the US Chamber of Commerce, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centres for
Disease Control, and some very expensive spy satellites that the French don't know about. It is intended as a guide for
American travelers only. No guarantee of accuracy is ensured or intended.

General overview:
France is a medium-sized foreign country situated in the continent of Europe. It is an important member of the world
community, though not nearly as important as it thinks. It is bounded by Germany, Spain, Switzerland and some smaller nations
of no particular consequence and with not very good shopping. France is a very old country with many treasures, such as the
Louvre and EuroDisney. Among its contributions to western civilization are champagne, Camembert cheese and the guillotine.
Although France likes to think of itself as a modern nation, air conditioning is little used and it is next to impossible to
get decent Mexican food. One continuing exasperation for American visitors is that the people willfully persist in speaking
French, though many will speak English if shouted at. As in any foreign country, watch your change at all times.
The People:
France has a population of 54 million people, most of whom drink and smoke a great deal, drive like lunatics, are dangerously
oversexed, and have no concept of standing patiently in line. The French people are in general gloomy, temperamental, proud,
arrogant, aloof, and undisciplined; and those are their good points. Most French citizens are Roman Catholic, though you would
hardly guess it from their behaviour. Many people are communists, and topless sunbathing is common. Men sometimes have girls'
names like Marie, and they kiss each other when they hand out medals. American travelers are advised to travel in groups and
to wear baseball caps and colourful trousers for easier mutual recognition.
Safety:
In general, France is a safe destination, though travelers are advised that, from time to time, it is invaded by Germany. By
tradition, the French surrender more or less at once and, apart from a temporary shortage of Scotch whisky and increased
difficulty in getting baseball scores and stock market prices, life for the visitor generally goes on
History:
France was discovered by Charlemagne in the Dark Ages. Other important historical figures are Louis XIV, the Huguenots, Joan
of Arc, Jacques Cousteau and Charles de Gaulle, who was President for many years and is now an airport.
Government:
The French form of government is democratic but noisy. Elections are held more or less continuously, and always result in a
run-off. For administrative purposes, the country is divided into regions, departments, districts' municipalities, cantons,
communes, villages, cafes, booths and floor tiles. Parliament consists of two chambers, the Upper and Lower (though,
confusingly, they are both on the ground floor), whose members are either Gaullists or communists, neither of whom is to be
trusted frankly. Parliament's principal preoccupations are setting off atomic bombs in the South Pacific, and acting indignant
when anyone complains. According to the most current State Department intelligence, the President now is someone named
Jacques. Further information is not available at this time.
Culture:
The French pride themselves on their culture, though it is not easy to see why. All their songs sound the same, and they have
hardly ever made a movie that you would want to watch for anything but the nude scenes. And nothing, of course, is more boring
than a French novel
Cuisine:
Let's face it, no matter how much garlic you put on it, a snail is just a slug with a shell on its back. Croissants, on the
other hand, are excellent, though it is impossible for most Americans to pronounce this word. In general, travelers are
advised to stick to cheeseburgers at leading hotels such as Sheraton and Holiday Inn.
Economy:
France has a large and diversified economy, second only to Germany's in Europe, which is surprising because people hardly work
at all. If they are not spending four hours dawdling over lunch, they are on strike and blocking the roads with their lorries
and tractors. France's principal exports, in order of importance to the economy, are wine, nuclear weapons, perfume, guided
missiles, champagne, high-calibre weaponry, grenade launchers, landmines, tanks, attack aircraft, miscellaneous armaments and
cheese.
Public holidays:
France has more holidays than any other nation in the world. Among its 361 national holidays are 197 saints' days, 37 National
Liberation Days, 16 Declaration of Republic Days, 54 Return of Charles de Gaulle in Triumph as if he Won the War Single-Handed
Days, 18 Napoleon Sent into Exile Days, 17 Napoleon Called Back from Exile Days, and 112 France is Great and the Rest of the
World is Rubbish Days. Other important holidays are National Nuclear Bomb Day January 12), the Feast of St Brigitte Bardot Day
(March 1), and National Guillotine Day (November 12).
Conclusion:
France enjoys a rich history, a picturesque and varied landscape, and a temperate climate. In short, it would be a very nice
country if it weren't inhabited by French people. The best thing that can be said for it is that it is not Germany.
A word of warning:
The consular services of the United States government are intended solely for the promotion of the interests of American
businesses such as McDonald's, Pizza Hut and the Coca-Cola Corporation. In the event that you are the victim of a crime or
serious injury involving at least the loss of a limb, report to the American Embassy between the hours of 5.l5 am and 5.20 am
on a Tuesday or Wednesday, and a consular official who is supremely indifferent to your plight will give you a list of
qualified dentists orsomething similarly useless. Remember, no one ordered you to go abroad. Personally, we always take our
holidays at Miami Beach, and you are advised to as well. Thank you and good luck.

[Teutonic Knight]

Quote[/b] (Knight_Yellow @ Feb. 20 2003,10:00)]Tuetonic edit that

they'll take as a de@dly offense and either veto you, kill you, or surrender to you..........

it should be

they'll take as a ly offence and either veto you, kill u, surrender to u or insult the quality of ur homelands meat products
rofl http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[chilling]

hehe.

'who was President for many years and is now an airport.'

Didn't you Americans do that to one of your blokies too.

[Blackbelt Jones]

Yeah, Regan National Airport in Washington DC, which is ironic coz Regan broke the back of the air traffic controller's union in the 80s and deregulated (read: f***ed up) our airlines... so they go and name an airport after him. In fact, the Republicans would name every damn building in Washington after him if they could (I know, I live in DC). Jeesh Now if they could just name the High Times and Hustler corporate office complex after Clinton, we'd be on to a groovier world. But that's just my 2 peseos...

But... as this is a thread poking a lil' fun at our friends the French... here is a good natured rib my reporter buddy in the UK told me about:

Bruce Willis was being interviewed by the French press about his movie Hart's War. When asked by an indignite French reporter the following question (do your best cheesy French accent): So Mr. Willis, will any one other than an American be allowed to save the world in one of your movies?, Willis looked the man up and down and said: Well, until the French land a man on the f**king moon, no. Next question.

Boo-Yah

Edited for piss poor grammer and content.

[G_Love]

Blackbelt Jones: If that Bruce Willis story is true (I'm not saying you're lying, just saying I haven't heard it before) that is quite possibly one of the funniest things I've ever heard.

Actually, the post at the beginning is quite good too. I'll have to pass that along to some friends of mine who are history buffs. They'll get a kick out of it.

[Blackbelt Jones]

G_Love,

My UK buddie actually has tape of it He says it was even played on some the cheeky UK tabloid shows I will ping him to find out which one. It slayed him and about every non-Frenchie in the room... even the Germans thought it was funny. A typical whining French question met with a typical arrogent yet blunt and to the point American answer. Ya gotta love our differances, eh? Good stuff...

My baby's got Sauce - G-Love and the Special Sauce

-BBJ

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Hey, you know, you win some, you lose some...

Honestly, with such a fine record, one can understand why war is not our (yes I am French) favorite option...

A forgotten one;

-1956; France try to seize Suez canal with Israel and UK and get kicked home by the US because kids shall not play on big guys playground. Stolen victory. Can you imagine that? A coalition with Israel and UK to go to Egypt and US opposing it?
Those US beatniks are far too soft...

Louis,

[JANOSIK007]

Quote[/b] (Longshanks @ Feb. 21 2003,05:31)]Japan beat the Koreans, and also the Chinese(in Korea) during different periods in their history. They also beat the Russians in 1905.
Although Japan won this short war, this whole conflict was suddenly stopped by American interference, before Russia could fully retaliate.

[JANOSIK007]

Quote[/b] (Longshanks @ Feb. 21 2003,05:33)]True, but France wouldn't exist without the U.S. either. They'd be speaking German right now.
No, actually France would more likely speak Russian as their second language, because Russians were already advancing West even before U.S. got involved in the war.
After the battle of Stalingrad Russians were finally holding the upper-hand.
And why would French speak Russian as the second language not the first?
Well because Russians weren't conquerors. They were saviours. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[CleverClothe]

Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 21 2003,18:35)]
Quote[/b] (Longshanks @ Feb. 21 2003,05:33)]True, but France wouldn't exist without the U.S. either. They'd be speaking German right now.
No, actually France would more likely speak Russian as their second language, because Russians were already advancing West even before U.S. got involved in the war.
After the battle of Stalingrad Russians were finally holding the upper-hand.
And why would French speak Russian as the second language not the first?
Well because Russians weren't conquerors. They were saviours. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
Thats not really true. The U.S. got involved in the war a full 3/4ths of a year before the battle of Stalingrad. And their first land battle was 3 months before the battle of Stalingrad was decided.

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 21 2003,18:35)]
Quote[/b] (Longshanks @ Feb. 21 2003,05:33)]True, but France wouldn't exist without the U.S. either. They'd be speaking German right now.
No, actually France would more likely speak Russian as their second language, because Russians were already advancing West even before U.S. got involved in the war.
After the battle of Stalingrad Russians were finally holding the upper-hand.
And why would French speak Russian as the second language not the first?
Well because Russians weren't conquerors. They were saviours. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
As has already been pointed out, that is incorrect. The U.S. joined the war in December 1941. In December 1941, the Axis powers were advancing on all fronts. The Battle for Stalingrad, which many consider the battle that ended German hopes for Russian conquest, was fought from August 1942 until February 1943.

The Battle for Kursk, which really was the deathblow to the Germans on the Eastern Front, was fought in July 1943.

Had America not entered the war, the French would not be speaking Russian. The Germans would not have had much of a threat of an allied invasion in France, which would have freed up many army divisions who were deployed in the West, for the Eastern Front. The Germans would also be able to concentrate more air power on the Russian front.

Both of those would have been deciding factors in the East. Without a second front or the threat of one, Germany most likely wins on the Russian front.

[JANOSIK007]

Quote[/b] (Longshanks @ Feb. 22 2003,03:38)]As has already been pointed out, that is incorrect. The U.S. joined the war in December 1941. In December 1941, the Axis powers were advancing on all fronts. The Battle for Stalingrad, which many consider the battle that ended German hopes for Russian conquest, was fought from August 1942 until February 1943.

The Battle for Kursk, which really was the deathblow to the Germans on the Eastern Front, was fought in July 1943.

Had America not entered the war, the French would not be speaking Russian. The Germans would not have had much of a threat of an allied invasion in France, which would have freed up many army divisions who were deployed in the West, for the Eastern Front. The Germans would also be able to concentrate more air power on the Russian front.

Both of those would have been deciding factors in the East. Without a second front or the threat of one, Germany most likely wins on the Russian front.
You're right about that. But still as the Stalingrad was fought Russia's industries worked at a full blow, easily out-producing Germans in production of war machines. Germans still wouldn't be able to prevent Stalingrad disaster and the Kursk tank battle as Russians had the superior tanks of WW II.

BTW, The allied invasion of France occured long after the Russian advance. Germans would simply not be able to move all of their troops on time ( From Africa and Western Europe ) to prevent Stalingrad and Kursk )
And about Lufwafle, there were plenty of anti-aircraft cannons to go around. Quantity has a quality of its own
as Stalin once said. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 22 2003,10:43)]

Quote[/b] ]Germans still wouldn't be able to prevent Stalingrad disaster and the Kursk tank battle as Russians had the superior tanks of WW II.

The Russians didn't always have superior tanks. This wasn't true when the Tigers and Panthers rolled off the production lines. Also even when the Russians had better tanks, they didn't use them right. They still lost more than 3 times as many tanks in tank battles with the Germans.

[JANOSIK007]

Yeah, Russians did have crapy tactics during the WW II. It almost cost them total destruction of their mother land.
The only thing that saved them was there huge amounts of everything. They would have been much more prepared if Stalin wouldn't get rid off many of his officers that were implementing a modernization of their army.

BTW, tigers were invented torwards the end of WW II and didn't get massed produced. So techincaly Russians did have better Tanks that were easier to produce and cheaper to make than the rest of them.

[Gregoshi]

Oh you guys are no fun. You went and got serious on us. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[jayrock]

i can summarize the french military...

CHEESE EATING SURRENDER MONKEYS

http://www.emotipad.com/emoticons/Viking.gif just ask my little friend here..lol.
http://www.emotipad.com/emoticons/ROTFLMAO.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

that better gregoshi.... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[JANOSIK007]

Somebody has mentioned earlier that French had the most stable army with few of foreigners fighting fighting for them.

How about their officers. Many of them were foreignrs.

They even had two generals from my country: Moric Benovsky and Milan Rastislav Stefanik.

Americans should especially know about Benovsky as he was fighting for your independence. He also proposed to Washington to build a naval base in Madagaskar ( as he was in control of the island ), but Washington didn't accept the offer.

Is there anybody else worth ackowledging that was a foreign officer in French army?

[Shadedredd]

Quote[/b] ]Oh you guys are no fun. You went and got serious on us

Don´t you just hate it when that happens greg? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Shadedredd]

Janis
Quote[/b] ]BTW, tigers were invented torwards the end of WW II and didn't get massed produced

A little bit misleading there...

The Tiger's origins go back as far as 1938 when development began on a Heavy tank program as a successor to the Panzer IV. The effort by Henschel produced prototype VK3601 a design that would eventually form the basis of the Tiger.

Production of the newly designated Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf E Tiger I (SdKfz 181) began in August 1942 at the same time the Tiger made it's first operational debut in Russia after the newly formed 1st Company 502nd Schwere Panzer Abeitlungen was rushed to the front on the 29th of the month at Mga near Leningrad. This was on the strict orders of Hitler who demanded they along with their Panzer IIIN escort be sent straight into battle.

1350 Tigers were produced between august 1942 and august 1944, when production shifted to the heavier and even more powerful Tiger II, which was named King Tiger.The design of the new tank was completed in late 1943, and production began in December 1943, initially together with the Tiger, and since august 1994 instead of the Tiger. Only 485 King Tiger tanks were produced before the war ended

The western Allies first met the Tiger I in Tunisia in December 1942. This new Panzer came as quite an unpleasant shock to the Allied tank crews who watched in sheer horror as their rounds bounced off the Tigers armour at distances less than 1000m. What was also quite frightening was the way the Allied tanks blew apart after thinking the Tiger was well out of effective range. The psychological impact German High command had always wished for had now been acheived & the effects of these early encounters would stay with Allied tank crews until the end of the war.

Quotes from WWII

I saw one of the new Tiger tanks at a range of around 1000 yards & fired seven times. I saw each round bounce off the front & side armour. The Tiger traversed it's gun & blew off our left track killing the driver.British Matilda tank commander Tunisia 1943

Our column engaged three Panzer 6 tanks at a ranges of between 200 - 800 yards. We stopped one of the Tigers by sustained fire on its tracks. This was after repeated shots against the upper armour which had no effect even at short range. The Tigers destroyed 8 of our M4 tanks & we were forced to retreat., even the disabled enemy tank was still firing at us as we retreated..... American armoured regiment commanders report North Africa 1943

I attacked a Panzer mk 6 at a range of 400 yards. I fired 8 - 10 times with armour piercing shells at the tanks side & turret. Every shot simply bounced off & the Tiger escaped after destroying both my flank tanks Russian tank commanders report 1943

A panzer mk 6 which the enemy has called Tiger appeared near our position. Our battery fired against it using Anti Tank rounds. None of the rounds were effective & after being joined by another two tanks the enemy destroyed our position & we were forced to retreat...Russian Anti-tank battery commanders report 1944

A tiger tank appeared from out of a wood firing on the move. It had already destroyed 6 of my T-34 tanks at ranges of between 200 - 600 meters. We fired bteween 20- 30 AP shells all of which simply bounced off the thick armour. We had to call in air support to fend the tank off which retreted back into the wood & got away Soviet tank crewman's report preblinka 1944

Our commanders have decided on a new tactic. If the Germans send a Tiger tank we will send out 8 shermans to meet it & we expect to lose 7 of them British optimism Normandy 1944

Our new Josef Stalin tanks seem to be getting the better of the German Tiger class. However I will not send my T-34 tanks into the battlefield without at least two Josef Stalins in case the Germans deploy Tiger tanks..... Russian Guards Commanders statement 1944. The commander was subsequently shot for cowardice

I drove my sherman column directly at a hidden Tiger tank near Beauville. The Tiger tank destroyed 7 of my company before it retreated. We fired constantly at the Tigers front armour with AP & HEAT rounds at ranges as short as 100 yards. None of our rounds penetrated the thick front armour... British Churchill Crewmans report Normandy 1944

Our scouts reported an enemy column consisting of a single Panzer mk6 Tiger & two Panzer 4 tanks moving Northwest. Our commander decided to pull back & discuss tactics. It was agreed to call in air support to deal with the threat rather than risk losing any of our own tanks.... British Armoured Battalion Captain's report Normandy 1944

We sighted two Tiger tanks of the Das Reich division at a range of 600 yards. We fired 4 shells which all bounced off. The Tigers subsequently turned around & headed straight for us. We pulled back after losing 6 shermans. One of our Firefly tanks managed to score a direct hit on the left flank of one of the Tigers before it too was destroyed by the surviving Tiger. We saw the crew escape from the crippled Tiger & climb onto it's comrade before the tank retreated. There were no survivors from our tanks which simply burst into flames......Canadian M4 Crewman's report Normandy 1944

Our company engaged three Tiger tanks which were moving towards our right flank. We fired 12 AP rounds at the Tigers side armour at ranges of 100 - 600 yards. apart from the the removal of the rippled paste coveing no significant damage was done to the enemy tanks. We lost 4 shermans & a number of halftracks before the Tigers escaped. I identified one of the attacking vehicles as a Liebestandarte Panzer division number 331....British Infantry commanders report Normandy 1944

We sighted a column of enemy armour consisting of 2 Tigers, a Panther & 2 Panzer 4 tanks. We called for armour support which arrived in the form of around 20 Firefly tanks. They manged to destroy the panther & one of the Panzer 4 tanks before the 2 Tiger tanks began to pick them off. We lost 6 firefly tanks in as many minutes before the Germans retreated. We provided fire support using heavy machine guns, mortars & PIAT rounds all of which were ineffective...British Sherman Crewman's report Normandy

[jayrock]

germany had a lot of armour the top three were the panther..

http://home.onestop.net/sears/germantanks/PzKpfw%20V%20Panther%20-Italy%201943.jpg

the tiger mark 1

http://home.onestop.net/sears/germantanks/PzKpfw%20VI%20-France%201944.jpg

and the tiger mark 2

http://home.onestop.net/sears/germantanks/PzKpfw%20VI%20Tiger%20-Ardenes%201944%20and%2045.jpg

and the three outclassed ant armour the allies could throw at them, their only failure was there wasnt enough of them.. they couldnt mach the attrition rate of the allies..

[Mr Frost]

Quote[/b] (_Martyr_ @ Feb. 19 2003,19:29)]English nobility is infact French
English royalty today is actually german . Between Austria and Prussia a sausage-eater found a way into every European throneroom . That's where the WWI saw about German Imperialism came from . Germanys' Empire consisted of Germany and a bratworst factory in Tunissia but the British Empire -which covered 1/4 of the entire planet- was ruled by Germans so technically there was such a thing then as German imperialism .

[Portuguese Rebel]

So the french dont like to fight...so what... ever been to paris? to the Louvre? Ever saw their monuments and statues? that will be the victory to stay...

And what is that about beeing beaten by italians twice? So what? i would like you to make fun of an italian in his face...
I'll give you a clue... you would lose some of your dental work... they are brave little dudes...

But, allas... the portuguese allied with the english and beaten napoleon and the spanish too... since we are at it... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Knight_Yellow]

lets just say the germans would have won every fight if they werent outnumbered 10 sumtimes 30 to 1.

the t-34 was good in that it had sloping armour and was very quikly produced. it took 5 shermans to destroy 1 tger tank. and finaly the italians sucked so bad there tanks wherent even bullet proof (thats actualy true).

whilst the nazis where total b******* u have to admit there tactics and way of designing equipment was top notch.

[jayrock]

Quote[/b] (Portuguese Rebel @ Feb. 23 2003,14:33)]So the french dont like to fight...so what... ever been to paris? to the Louvre? Ever saw their monuments and statues? that will be the victory to stay...

And what is that about beeing beaten by italians twice? So what? i would like you to make fun of an italian in his face...
I'll give you a clue... you would lose some of your dental work... they are brave little dudes...

But, allas... the portuguese allied with the english and beaten napoleon and the spanish too... since we are at it... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
dude, i know all about italians, some of my best m8's are italians... tell you one thing though, the men dont scare me, the women petrify me...lol. my friends sister went ballistic on her boyfriend once, and jesus, it took me and my friend to get her off him...

[Kraxis]

The Italian soldiers did not lack courage... but their leaders were impotent to the extent it was horrible. The Italian troops under Rommel did as well as was expected of them given their equipment, meaning that they did quite well. Later in the war the Italians surrendered in masses because they knew their leaders lack of talent.

BTW the French threw back the Italians in the Alps despite being massively outnumbered at a time when one would expect the French army to collapse. The Italians only managed to not lose territory because France had to capitulate to Germany. So the French were not that bad.

[oblivious maximus]

There is no doubt to braveness of the Latin, but in WWII they under-equipt themselves and had no desire to be in that war.It could be said that WWII is Italy`s Vietnam or Afganistan.

Shred.. i like Military Humor also,it is a great site.

I think that is a little harsh on the France,although i just don`t understand their arrogance.They are surrounded by-
Britain:Once had the largest colonial empire in history.

Spain:Conquered more territory,even more people speak theirlanguage.

Italy: Richest history in Europe.French women would rather be with them.

Germany:Pounce them any day of the week in a 1 on 1

Maybe it`s `little man`s complex?

[JANOSIK007]

Quote[/b] (Shadedredd @ Feb. 22 2003,18:55)]A little bit misleading there...
I didn't mislead. Tiger debut was in 1942. This was around the time that Russia was getting the upper hand on the Eastern front ( so basically the war over right than ). And it was a crapy debut too. Just read this:

On 23 August 1942, first four PzKpfwVIH tanks arrived to sPzAbt502 unit (Mga station near Leningrad) . These tanks had a harmless long-range fire contact with Soviet troops near Sinjavino village. Then the tanks tried to attack, but three of them were immobilized because of mechanical breakdowns. The Germans managed to evacuate the Tigers during nighttime, but these tanks were repaired only in September 15.
Early morning of September 22, four Tigers and one PzKpfwIII started an attack to Gaytolovo village. They were faced by arty fire and the PzKpfwIII was flamed almost immediately. Then the command tank was hit, (the engine was quit) and its crew left it. After that two more Tigers were killed, and last one stopped in a swamp. So all of five tanks were destroyed.
At this time, an evacuation couldn't be performed. Two days after, the Germans brought out all of the instruments and armament, and then exploded the tanks.
The Soviets managed to capture a Tiger on 17 January 1943, when they tried to deblockade Leningrad.

According to all of these quotes shells just bounce off the Tigers. Even more suprised were the Germans when they've firs encountered Katusha in action. Though they weren't accurate they would easilly penetrate any armor.

Amongst many advantages T-34 had was sloped armor, which enabled maximum armor at high speed ( 50 km/h ). T-34 were also easier to maneuvre than Tigers.

Also the Russian KVs were a force to be reckon with. They were proven superior in many encounters with the Tigers.

On 23-24 June 1941 a single KV-2 of 2nd tank division conducted an armored road block in southern Lithuania (near Rassaynjay town), holding up the German advance. The Germans found themself in a trouble when they lost whole supply truck collumn. Numerious attacks including a battery of 50mm anti-tank guns (which were destroyed at 500m distance), Flak 88 (the Soviets allowed to mount this gun at 700m distance and then killed it) and an engineer unit attack all failed to silence the Russian tank. Artillery fire of 105mm howitzers achieved a hit to the track and the KV was partially immobilised. This heavy tank at the only road and surrounding swamps made German troops supply (with ammo, fuel and food) and wounded soldiers evacuation impossible. The Germans were forced to use such trick: 50(&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif tanks immitated an attack, so it became possible to set another 88mm flak, which managed to eliminate the tank after two days it held up the advance of the entire 6th Panzer Division.
The Stukas were not used beacause a commander not allowed an operation against one tank.
By the Germans' accounts, the crew could have escaped easily several times before the final attack, but the heroes always chooses own fate...

1 versus 43
On 18 August 1941, an alone KV-1 (the number 864, the commander was lt.Kolobanov) was dug in and camouflaged near Krasnogvardeysk town (Leningrad area). The tank had an order to defend the road from Kinigsep. Four more KVs were ordered to defense two other roads. All tanks got double ammoloads, 2/3 of rounds were armor piercing. An offensive of 8th German panzer division was expected. Kolobanaov's KV had great hidden position in the woods on the hill, the crossroad located down there between swamps.
In the next day German motorcycle recon troops, halftrack and one light track passed by road. Five minutes later the expected column of 43 tanks appeared and filled the road. The 1st Soviet round flamed the head tank, after two more shots the 2nd tank was flamed too. Then Kolobanov opened fire on column's tail and flamed the last tank: the Germans were locked. They even couldn't note Soviet tank and opened no-target-fire. Tried to run, some tanks were immobilized in the swamp. The chaos established on the road. Soviet tankers killed 22 German tanks during 30 minutes. Then the KV was spotted by the Germans and they opened aimed fire. In spite of impossibility of German tank guns to penetrate thick KV's armor, knocking rounds made terrible working conditions for Soviet crew. One of German rounds struck the turret ring and the KV was forced to leave its trench and maneuver by whole hull for aim. Then the Soviets noted two German towed guns appeared on the crossroad. The first shell disabled one gun, but another gun managed to do one shot and damaged KV's periscope. Than that gun was destroyed too. Also ammo was almost out, and Kolobanov got congratulations via the radio and an order to go back. Already three another KVs were on the way to the battlefield, and they killed 20 more German tanks.
There were destroyed 42 German tanks total and two guns. Kolobanov's tank got 135 hits, but no one penetration.
Kolobanov was awarded with the Order of Lenin, Usov (driver) with the Order of the Red Banner.

So you see Russian tanks must have been superior or else they wouldn't have won the war. One downside to Russian tanks was ( in most cases ) an inexperienced crew.

German General Reinhardt, commander of the 41st PzKorp, regarding the battle of the Dubissa river on June 23rd 1941, between 80 BT tanks and 20 KVs of 2nd Soviet armoured division, and the entire 6th PzDiv equipped with PzKpfw IVs and PzKpfw 35(t):
One hundred of our tanks, which about a third were PzKpfw IV, occupied their positions against a counter-strike. Part of our forces met the enemy frontaly, but most of them were in their flanks. They hit the steel monsters from the three sides, but the attempts to destroy them were unsuccessful. By the contrary, it were our tanks the ones who were knocked-out. After a long struggle with the Soviet giants, the German armoured units began to withdraw trying to avoid the aniquilation. [...] One of them [the KVs] get close to a panzer who was stuck in a moody brook. Without hesitation, the black monster just roll over it, crushing it completely. At that time, arrived a German howitzer of 105 mm; its commander, seeing the aproximation of enemy tanks, ordered to open a continue fire, without causing any damage. One of them [the KVs] get close to 100m of the howitzer, which fired again, and its grenate hit the tank with all its strenght. The tanks stopped as hit by a lightning. We made it thought the gunners. Yes, we made it, told the captain of the piece. But the expresson in their faces suddenly changed when one of them shouted: It's moving again. There was no doubt when the shining caterpillar get close to the howitzer and crushed it as a toy, keep on moving later as nothing would happened. In that battle, the KVs of the 2nd Armoured Division claimed to destroy 40 panzers and 40 guns (most of them anti-tank guns of 37 mm, crushed the same way that the howitzer).

The general Morgunov (commander of the armoured forces in Ukrane in 1941) reported:
It must be noted the good work made by the 4th, 8th and 15th Mechanized Corps, that demostrated that a single KV was equal to 10-14 enemy tanks in combat.

I think this should convince people that Russians won the war by technical superiority. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Sorry Shadredd, but I had to make my point.

[Shadedredd]

Quote[/b] ]The general Morgunov (commander of the armoured forces in Ukrane in 1941) reported:
It must be noted the good work made by the 4th, 8th and 15th Mechanized Corps, that demostrated that a single KV was equal to 10-14 enemy tanks in combat.


LOL...nearly just choked on my cornflakes ...


The Germans had by far the superior tanks, but where guilty of over engineering. Thus making repairs overly complicated. ´The russian tanks did not have this problem. Plus they where hopelessly outnumbered:

Eastern Europe/
Advance to Odra January 45 Russia vs. Germany. 6460 Russian
934 German

Eastern Front/
Poland July 17, 44 -
August 44 Russia vs. Germany. 6000 Russian
1800 German

Russia/Smolensk August 43-
October 43 Russia vs. Germany. 1400 Russian
250 German

Russia/Zitadelle and Russian Counter-Attack July 5, 43-
September 43 Germany vs. Russia 2800 German
3600 Russian

Russia/Caucasus,
Stalingrad June 42-
November 42 Germany vs. Russia. 3000 German
1250 Russian

Russia/Baravenko January 28, 42-
May 17, 42 Russia vs. Germany. 5000 Russian
3000 German

And to top it all....

Russia/Barbarossa June 22, 41-
December 5, 41 Germany vs. Russia. 3200 German
20000 Russian

[chilling]

Oh, dear.

This thread was going so well until you lot started to talk about tanks and stuff.

Can we have it closed and you mover your chat over to www.tanksofww2.com

[redrooster]

Quote[/b] (JANOSIK007 @ Feb. 23 2003,23:42)]One of them [the KVs] get close to 100m of the howitzer, which fired again, and its grenate hit the tank with all its strenght. The tanks stopped as hit by a lightning. We made it thought the gunners. Yes, we made it, told the captain of the piece. But the expresson in their faces suddenly changed when one of them shouted: It's moving again.
Honestly, it sounds a little like russian propaganda, anywhere you know i can read about the kv online?

[Knight_Yellow]

heres how good the tiger was

The T - 34 in the early days of Barbarossa proved to be far superioir to any German machines. Until the introduction of the Panzer VI Tiger. the Tiger soon turned the tide destroying T - 34's in huge numbers. The official tally is 10 T -34's for every Tiger lost & most Tigers were lost due to mechanical problems, Air power or hidden Anti -tank guns very few were destroyed by enemy tanks. Only the upgrading of the gun to 85 mm later in the war proved to be able to puncture the Tigers immense front armour even then the distances involved to aachieve this placed the Soviet crews at great danger. The conclusion is if you see a Tiger whilst in your T -34 call for a heavier tank

AND

The M4 Sherman was the most numerous allied tank on the Wertern battlefields. The Sherman met it's first Tiger in the desert where it fared very badly due it's thin armour & high profile. the Sherman also had the undesirable effect of bursting into flames when hit which led to it's nickname of Ronson .. because it lit first time. To the Germans however the Tommy Cooker was an easy target & easily destroyed. Tiger crews had nothing much to fear from the inadequate 76mm gun. In France Shermans were destroyed en masse & large numbers were credited to the Tiger aces. As Joachim Pieper noted the Sherman gave hhis new troop much needed Target practice. Fortunately for the Allies the Sherman was available in huge numbers being so easy to maass produce so even with the high losses sustained by the tank they were replaced quicker than they were destroyed. Tigers however still enjoyed a ratio of 8 Shermans to every Tiger. Although the Tigers were normally destroyed by air power. Tank to tak the ratio was probably 5 times higher

so there we have it the tiger rocked in all respects only being brought down due to mechanical faults and allied airpower.

[chilling]

Can you imagine the look on all those AUM's faces when a T34 comes rumbling over the nearest dune.


This tread is now officially off topic.


What about those Gunners, awsome.

[JANOSIK007]

Quote[/b] (redrooster @ Feb. 24 2003,09:02)]Honestly, it sounds a little like russian propaganda, anywhere you know i can read about the kv online?
I am not Russian ( just to let you know ). And just because somebody says something good about Russian Tanks it doesn't have to be a Russian propaganda.

Russians did have superiority in numbers, but it wasn't that their tanks were lacking that brought them down. It was the inexperience of the crew.

Germans were tactically superior with perhaps the Tiger2 being better than any Russian tank ( but they were produced slowly and were brought to the war at the very end ). And besides Tigers were poorly engineered that's why many of the feel due to technical probs.

[JANOSIK007]

Quote[/b] (Knight_Yellow @ Feb. 24 2003,09:08)]heres how good the tiger was

The T - 34 in the early days of Barbarossa proved to be far superioir to any German machines. Until the introduction of the Panzer VI Tiger. the Tiger soon turned the tide destroying T - 34's in huge numbers. The official tally is 10 T -34's for every Tiger lost & most Tigers were lost due to mechanical problems, Air power or hidden Anti -tank guns very few were destroyed by enemy tanks. Only the upgrading of the gun to 85 mm later in the war proved to be able to puncture the Tigers immense front armour even then the distances involved to aachieve this placed the Soviet crews at great danger. The conclusion is if you see a Tiger whilst in your T -34 call for a heavier tank

AND

The M4 Sherman was the most numerous allied tank on the Wertern battlefields. The Sherman met it's first Tiger in the desert where it fared very badly due it's thin armour & high profile. the Sherman also had the undesirable effect of bursting into flames when hit which led to it's nickname of Ronson .. because it lit first time. To the Germans however the Tommy Cooker was an easy target & easily destroyed. Tiger crews had nothing much to fear from the inadequate 76mm gun. In France Shermans were destroyed en masse & large numbers were credited to the Tiger aces. As Joachim Pieper noted the Sherman gave hhis new troop much needed Target practice. Fortunately for the Allies the Sherman was available in huge numbers being so easy to maass produce so even with the high losses sustained by the tank they were replaced quicker than they were destroyed. Tigers however still enjoyed a ratio of 8 Shermans to every Tiger. Although the Tigers were normally destroyed by air power. Tank to tak the ratio was probably 5 times higher

so there we have it the tiger rocked in all respects only being brought down due to mechanical faults and allied airpower.
But T-34 was a medium tank and it just wouldn't do the trick against German Heavies.

Here are some comparisons of Heavy tanks ( going from left: Pershing, Tiger1, Tiger2, Matilda, Churchill, KV-1, and JS 2 )



Speed 32 37 35 24 20 35 37
Range 148 140 170 112 140 335 240
Main Gun 90 88 88 40 75 76.2 122
Machine gun 2 / 7.62 1/12.7 2 / 7.92 3 / 7.92 2 / 7.92 2 / 7.92 3 / 7.62 3 / 7.62
Crew 5 5 5 4 5 5 4
Armor 112 110 180 80 152 130 160

Notice that only Tiger2 beats KV-1 in armor.

Here are some Med. Tanks ( Going from the left: Sherman, Lee/Grant, III, IV, V-Panther, T-34/76, T-34/85, M13/40, Somua, Mk. VIII )


38 42 40 38 46 53 50 30 40 51
Range 160 193 105 200 200 400 300 200 260 278
Main Gun 75 75 75 75 75 76 85 47 47 75
Machine gun 2/7.62 1/12.7 4 / 7.62 2 / 7.92 2 / 7.92 1 / 7.92 2 / 7.62 2 / 7.62 3 / 8.00 1 / 7.50 2 / 7.92
Crew 5 6 5 5 5 4 5 4 3 5
Armor 75 57 60 80 120 75 75 32 55 76


The fact that Russsian tanks were cheaper, produced easilly
and rapidly, and better enginered, made them the best tanks of WW2. And don't forget about Katusha. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Gregolas]

Dang I have this urge to dig out my old Panzer Blitz (board) wargame...

Anyone ever heard Al Stewart's Roads to Moscow? It is an 8 minute song about the Eastern front from the eyes of a Russian soldier. Excellent song. A few of the choice verses go like this:

All summer they drove us back through the Ukraine
Smolensk and Viasma soon fell
By autumn we stood with our backs to the town of Orel.
Closer and closer to Moscow they come
Riding the wind like a bell
General Guderian stands at the crest of the hill.

Winter brought with her the rains, oceans of mud filled the roads
Glueing the tracks of their tanks to the ground while the sky filled with snow...

And towards the end of the war:

Two broken Tigers on fire in the night
Flicker their souls to the wind.
We wait in the line for the final approach to begin.
It's been almost four years that I've carried a gun.
At home it will almost be Spring.
The flames of the Tigers are lighting the road to Berlin

Sigh.

BTW, this is Gregoshi. I happen to create a Junior Patron account to help me trouble shoot any problems JPs may have. I'm really just testing something else now. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Portuguese Rebel]

Quote[/b] (jayrock @ Feb. 23 2003,18:05)]dude, i know all about italians, some of my best m8's are italians... tell you one thing though, the men dont scare me, the women petrify me...lol. my friends sister went ballistic on her boyfriend once, and jesus, it took me and my friend to get her off him...
Lol... yeah.. before you cheat or something on latin girls you got to know if you can handle her http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
And another thing, they have no sense of humor when it comes to you saying: Errrr... it's not what it seems.... errrr... i can explain. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Portuguese Rebel]

Hey Gregoshi, it's nice to see a moderator humble himself to the rank of us underdogs... chers m8 http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[jayrock]

as to the sherman debate, numbers were their greatest asset, over 46000 were built during ww2, more than all the others combined..lol..

it had two other assets, it was simply engineered, you know the kiss rule, keep it simple stupid, as a result they had fewer breakdowns it was very reliable... the other asset was repairability, gi's could repair the things with just about anything they found... although i'd say their sheer numbers is what won over german tanks... they used to lay in ambush, and as soon a german tanks passed, they'd zip in and pop the from behind...

[Cazbol]

The Soviets certainly made some excellent hardware during the war, like T-34s, KVs, IL-2s, Katyushas etc. One should however be aware that the Soviets were notorious for large exaggerations i battle reports. The otherwise excellent Soviet tank attack on the main airfield in the Stalingrad kettle destroyed over 70 transport aircraft, but in the official reports the number was raised to over 400, if I remember correctly. One should therefore take the old Soviet statistics with a grain of salt.

The quality of hardware such as tanks can't just be measured in kill ratios. Being able to mass produce is also an essential factor. In that respect the Tiger put a lot of strain on German resources. Tigers consumed outrageous quantities of fuel which not only hampered them but also all other vehicles and planes, which often lead to tanks in good condition being abandoned for lack of fuel. The same goes for the general construction and in the last part of the war most German tanks had to be produced without a turret, i.e. with only a fixed gun.

It is therefore pretty hopeless to find an absolute measure for what is best.

[Cazbol]

Quote[/b] (Shadedredd @ Feb. 19 2003,18:56)]
Quote[/b] ] Although to be fair, the French were key in helping us to win the revolution.


-- American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as de Gaulle Syndrome, and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; France only wins when America does most of the fighting. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
The post is funny and of course one doesn't expect everything to be precise. It's the humour that counts.

However, in your reply to the comment you seem to be using a rubber ruler as a measure. The examples for WW1 and the American revolution are pretty much identical but with the roles reversed.

In the American revolution the colonists started on their own and did most of the fighting but were losing pretty badly against professional troops. The arrival of the French turned the tide through their strength rather than their sacrifices.

In WW1 the French bore the brunt of the fighting losing horrendous numbers of men but without doing too well. Then, late in the war the US joins the war. This signalled to the Germans that they no longer had any hope of wearing the French and British out, as there now was a new enemy with fresh troops and a huge population from which to recruit troops. Germany therefore soon surrendered.

How the US/English colonists are the major contributor in both cases is beyond me.

Just a thought, but the original post is a good one.

[Teutonic Knight]

Quote[/b] (Knight_Yellow @ Feb. 24 2003,09:08)]heres how good the tiger was

The T - 34 in the early days of Barbarossa proved to be far superioir to any German machines. Until the introduction of the Panzer VI Tiger. the Tiger soon turned the tide destroying T - 34's in huge numbers. The official tally is 10 T -34's for every Tiger lost & most Tigers were lost due to mechanical problems, Air power or hidden Anti -tank guns very few were destroyed by enemy tanks. Only the upgrading of the gun to 85 mm later in the war proved to be able to puncture the Tigers immense front armour even then the distances involved to aachieve this placed the Soviet crews at great danger. The conclusion is if you see a Tiger whilst in your T -34 call for a heavier tank

AND

The M4 Sherman was the most numerous allied tank on the Wertern battlefields. The Sherman met it's first Tiger in the desert where it fared very badly due it's thin armour & high profile. the Sherman also had the undesirable effect of bursting into flames when hit which led to it's nickname of Ronson .. because it lit first time. To the Germans however the Tommy Cooker was an easy target & easily destroyed. Tiger crews had nothing much to fear from the inadequate 76mm gun. In France Shermans were destroyed en masse & large numbers were credited to the Tiger aces. As Joachim Pieper noted the Sherman gave hhis new troop much needed Target practice. Fortunately for the Allies the Sherman was available in huge numbers being so easy to maass produce so even with the high losses sustained by the tank they were replaced quicker than they were destroyed. Tigers however still enjoyed a ratio of 8 Shermans to every Tiger. Although the Tigers were normally destroyed by air power. Tank to tak the ratio was probably 5 times higher

so there we have it the tiger rocked in all respects only being brought down due to mechanical faults and allied airpower.
is this one of those big political discussions where you start talking about tanks?.......

[Kalle]

I`d like to get back to topic issue from tanks to french wars.

I understand the post is ment in a funny way but i want to reply anyway.

As for hastings one must as someone allready stated give the honour not to french military supremecy but to viking accenndents. The swede in me is talking

More could be said to, about Charlemagne for example.
But i wont, i will just talk about the 30 years war, one of the most important conflicts in europes history.

France was indeed one of the victourios powers in this conflict together with the swedes. The swedes handled most of the fighting but after their defeat at Nördlingen 1634 or was it 36 they could not fight alone and france was forced to go to war actively and so they did. Until that point they had only supported Sweden financially but now they sent their forces into the war aswell.

Together the swedes, french and their german protestant allies won the war.

This was thus a war in which france can claim victory, though not alone.

[Shadedredd]

Soo..what your saying, is that France waited until everyones armies where totally exhausted and low on resources, and THEN decided to join the war for their own gains.

Thats not like the French. is it? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

[Frederik III]

Arf, it's been quite a while since I last came here, and I was quite amused to read this thread. Quite funny when you think of it.

And I can't say I'm not sharing some points that were made. We, in France, do not consider ourselves as a great fighting nation...

But do not under-estimate a nation which is quite surrounded by heavy weight neighbours (like Italy, Spain, Germany or even England) and was still able to last that long.

Of course, I'm talking about History only as current events are way too much serious to be debated that way.

Anyway I just wanted to point that Napoleonic battles / wars were a bit too much quickly eluded. We all knew that the guy eventually died on a small rock in the middle of nowhere (and heavily guarded by thousands of english soldiers). But before that, you can't deny he pushed french borders quite far from where they were before

[Knight_Yellow]

see tuetonic i told you it ends up tanks with me http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[BlackWatch McKenna]

Quote[/b] ]Soo..what your saying, is that France waited until everyones armies where totally exhausted and low on resources, and THEN decided to join the war for their own gains.

Thats not like the French. is it?

I thought that was our job.

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (BlackWatch McKenna @ Feb. 25 2003,16:02)]
Quote[/b] ]Soo..what your saying, is that France waited until everyones armies where totally exhausted and low on resources, and THEN decided to join the war for their own gains.

Thats not like the French. is it?

I thought that was our job.
How do you figure?

The U.S. fought for 4 years in WW2. At that time the Axis were still winning the war. In the Korean War, American troops fought from the beginning. Same with Vietnam, Panama and the Gulf War.

[Blackbelt Jones]

Yeah, I gotta agree with Shanks. Though I am not adverse to a little self depreciating humor (we Yanks need thick skins these days), I feel your comment only be relevant to WWI. I am quite sure veterans of WWII, Korea, Vietnam MAY disagree with you a little there... I think the Japanese and Germans were some pretty tough customers when we entered the war (yeah, I know, we entered it late. Damned if you show up late to the party, damned if you're the first one there&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif), and the Koreans and Vietnamese have always had respect for stellar soldiering.

[oblivious maximus]

I earlier posted:

I think that is a little harsh on the France,although i just don`t understand their arrogance.They are surrounded by-
Britain:Once had the largest colonial empire in history.

Spain:Conquered more territory,even more people speak theirlanguage.

Italy: Richest history in Europe.French women would rather be with them.

Germany:Pounce them any day of the week in a 1 on 1

later- Frederik III...
But do not under-estimate a nation which is quite surrounded by heavy weight neighbours (like Italy, Spain, Germany or even England) and was still able to last that long.

As much as i dislike France(and i REALLY REALLY do),i have to admit.. that is a good point.

[Blackbelt Jones]

oblivious maximus-

Excellent point. Not to bring this to the level of a video game (although this IS a forum for a video game), France is bloody hard to play for that reason alone. The fact that they were able to carve out and hold onto a nation for so long (albeit with help... a LOT of help... but what nation hasn't had help from others? The US revolution and, indeed, expansion was helped along by the French, as has been pointed out before) is a testiment to some level of fortitude.

Part 1... Funny Stuff: A buddy of mine e-mailed me a Soldier of Surrender j-peg magazine cover (a take off on soldier of fortune) that absolutely takes the piss out of France. White Flags: Technology that could save your life / Fitness: Three Exercises to Keep your arms up longer etc. It is just sitting on my desktop... I read how to post images, but I don't have a site to link it to. If someone wants, I'll e-mail it to them... it BEGS to be posted on this thread

Part 2... General Question to those who may know: I was watching a talking head on the BBC World News and he mentioned that the average age in the French armed forces was 40 Could that possibly be true? His point was that its' military was increasingly full of bureaucrats and aging officers. It's shocking if it is true, but I have my doubts... even for the French military.

[Shadedredd]

blackbelt..please post me that cover http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Ill save it on my web posting site and make an image here.

[Blackbelt Jones]

Shade,

I just sent it to you from my work address Hope you like it

Cheers,

BBJ

[Shadedredd]

Yep... I like it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif thanks... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

http://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/frenchy.gif

[chilling]

Hehe Jones.

'Vietnamese have always had respect for stellar soldiering'.


That would be the stellar soldering that lost you that war would it?


It's a joke OK. Not a personal insult, just so's you know.

Oh, and Shaderdredd/blackbelt, LMFAO.



See that FBI over there? Can't tell the difference between a dodery old bloke who lives on a council estate in Birmingham and someone who's done the biggest con-job in the whole world, one of Americas most wanted.

Yes he shares the same name, but, really.......

I'm glad my real names Al Capone.

[Frederik III]

Just as an information: you may know that the US government just bought some thousands of gasmasks to provide the Pentagon just in case of a retaliation there.

These gasmasks were bought from... a French factory. We are not only leaders in white flags... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

The soldier of surrender stuff is quite funny, I grabbed it. As a reply, I have a fake Star Wars cover named Gulf Wars - Episode II - Clone of the Attack. Don't know how to include it, if anyone's interested, I can send it.

[Gregoshi]

Frederick, that Gulf Wars movie poster is in this (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=6;t=6641) Tavern thread. It is very good.

[Frederik III]

'm awfully sorry for this, Gregoshi... Thanks anyway

*go gets himself a brand new pair of eyes...*

Didn't see it... It was behind my white flag waving

[Shadedredd]

Quote[/b] ]These gasmasks were bought from... a French factory. We are not only leaders in white flags...

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/pat.gif Nice to see our gallic cousins are not taking this to seriously http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Shadedredd]

Thanks again BBJ http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif a screenshot worth a thousand words:


http://members.fortunecity.com/hillychaos/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/French.military.gif

[CleverClothe]

Quote[/b] (Cazbol @ Feb. 25 2003,04:46)]In the American revolution the colonists started on their own and did most of the fighting but were losing pretty badly against professional troops. The arrival of the French turned the tide through their strength rather than their sacrifices.
Losing pretty badly? Not really.

The colonists one a good number of their battles. And most of their loses were by slim margines... and even ended up in strategic victories. By the time the French took part in the last battle of the war (the only one they took part in), the British were being pushed out of the south, starved in the center... and still staying put in New York.

They were generally winning. Though like any revolution, it really needed some type of big outside support to secure long term victory. Thats where the French come it.

They beat the British navy in a key battle at a key time. And helped the Americans at the Battle of Yorktown (9,000 Americans and 7,000 French).

There were several victories by the poorly trained and armed Colonists over the professional British (especially in the early part of the war).

[JANOSIK007]

One thing Shadedredd forgot to add is that even in during the Frankish Empire they have experienced many losses.

Ex. During the 700s they have invaded the united Slavic tribes in the Central Europe. The result: Their holding-up-the-arms exercise paid off. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
But even that didn't help them as my ancestors slaughtered them up.

I've read an excerpt some time ago about one tribal chieftain that's been given a command by Samo to harass the Franks until they wold get on to the battlefield.