"We surrender" Said the French

[TankCopter]

People mock the French because after finally losing the Napoleonic wars, they went to lose every conflict they entered into that I can think of right at this second. That, and every nation has their stereotype. The Americans are jerks, we Aussies are khaki-short wearing bogans who love a beer, the Irish are drunks, the English are stubborn with bad teeth, and the French are cowards. People love to laugh at other people.

 

[RufusMcLaser]

I suppose I'll dip my toe into the oily waters of this thread. The "we surrender!" joke seems to have risen to popularity around late 2002 or early 2003 as part of the American-centered backlash against French perfidity re: the invasion of Iraq, but it's certainly older than that. Winston's War by M. Dobbs, published in November of 2002, has two (fictional) MPs discussing the prospects for war in 1939 when one remarks "What, the French? Who've lost every war they fought in the last hundred years?"
Not that I wish to imply that line reflected how people actually thought seventy years ago, only that the meme had at least surfaced when Dobbs was writing the book in 2001 or 2002.
He had a point, you know. They haven't won a war on their own in a very long time. Plenty of courage on the battlefield, quite a few battles won, but not many wars.

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

France actually have one of the best military records in the world. That's right, in the world. It's only because of WWII that they have become "cheese-eating surrender monkeys"

 

[A Pious Cultist]

America has an ocean between it and Germany aswell as a vastly superiour army in both terms of armament and size. France didn't. It was pretty fucked, I don't begrudge their decision in the slightest.

 

[ThePeaceFrog]

Because from the time of Napolean, the french have had one of the greatest fighting armies known to man,in the Napoleonic Wars they were able to push further into Russia than even Hitler, whilst alreading annihilating the Prussians (the greatest military state in germany) and other European countries.
In WW1, they bore the hardest fighting imaginable, bearing the brunt of the onslaught and taking truly horrific casualties that served only as testament to their bravery.
Even as late as WW2, the French had the most formidibale army in Europe, larger than the Germans, and even debatably, better equipped, with the Char-B battle tank easily being the better than any of the early panzers, which were typified by thin armour and pathetic weapons.
The problem was that the French Army and its many advantages were mis-mananged on an epic scale, with the entire chain of command riven with pensioners and a lack of morale. The French were too complacent and too scared of entering another conflict such as WW1. Therefore, they were easy meat for the smaller, but far more driven German fighting forces, who used the technology they had to the greatest and deadliest effect.
This defeat was one of the most shocking acts in military history, one of the greatest European overcome by what could only be described as an uncouth usurper. Therefore it only stands to reason that it has left an indelible mark upon the honour of the french armed services, one that has never truly been removed. The French are remembered as surrenderers as that is what they did, they had the largest army in Europe and wasted it through a combination of fear and stupidity.

 

[AngloDoom]

French people are like gypsies; the last races on Earth people can call nasty names and get away with it.

 

[.[B@lL15T1C].]

The French are considered cowards because they are cowards; throughout history they've proven that they talk big and run fast. They treat their allies like shit (QUEBEC I'M LOOKING AT YOU!!!) and when they're in trouble demand that their allies help them. History has proven that the French suck.

Quebec is hardly a proper representation of french speaking people in this world. Even people from France hate Quebec.

The black spot of Canada still remains today.


EDIT: And Im pretty sure that no surrender took place in WW1 by the french.

Fair point. And France didn't surrender during WWI, but they still lost.

they lost WW1?

where did you learn your history mate?

 

[Sulu]

Correct and the Americans did very little in that war. It was a Franco-British victory

Not true, the Americans where the main factor behind the German 1918 Spring Offensive which ultimately failed and allowed the Allies to launch their own offensive in the summer which was one of the factors that ended the war.

The Germans knew that they couldn't hope to compete with the Allies with the influx of American troops and huge industrial capacity so simply by entering the war America did more to end it than 3 years of bloody fighting.

Well that is all reletive, the American involvement was small and they really hopped into the war as the tide was turning.
USA = 4.3 million troops, KIA = 116,708
UK = 6.2 million troops, KIA = 885,138
France = 8.4 million troops, KIA = 1,397,800
Russia = 12 million troops, KIA = 1,811,000
Italy = 5.6 million troops, KIA = 651,010

So as you can see by the figures, the USA contriputed a very small proportion of thier population compared to the other major allied powers. WW1 was so bloody that you can pretty accurately chart how active a nation was by the proportion of troops that died, I hadn't added Romania to the list but they sacrificed more than the USA. In fact the second Germany was pulled into trench warfare they knew that it was inevitable that they would lose, whether the americans fought one battle or not. To put it into perspective the German Empire lost 2 million soldiers in the war, now this nation was one of the main players and of course was there from the start.
Short answer is no the americans did not win world war 1.

 

[Ghostkai]

.]

The French are considered cowards because they are cowards; throughout history they've proven that they talk big and run fast. They treat their allies like shit (QUEBEC I'M LOOKING AT YOU!!!) and when they're in trouble demand that their allies help them. History has proven that the French suck.

Quebec is hardly a proper representation of french speaking people in this world. Even people from France hate Quebec.

The black spot of Canada still remains today.


EDIT: And Im pretty sure that no surrender took place in WW1 by the french.

Fair point. And France didn't surrender during WWI, but they still lost.

they lost WW1?

where did you learn your history mate?

I was thinking the same thing. There's alot of people spouting random crap as "facts" in this thread. It's really quite amusing.
On a side note: Why on earth is it mostly American's doing the bashing? (Yes, I know, I know - Iraq, and it looks like the French were right ^_^) The USA might not even exist were it not for the French...

 

[Faps]

Correct and the Americans did very little in that war. It was a Franco-British victory

Not true, the Americans where the main factor behind the German 1918 Spring Offensive which ultimately failed and allowed the Allies to launch their own offensive in the summer which was one of the factors that ended the war.

The Germans knew that they couldn't hope to compete with the Allies with the influx of American troops and huge industrial capacity so simply by entering the war America did more to end it than 3 years of bloody fighting.

Well that is all reletive, the American involvement was small and they really hopped into the war as the tide was turning.
USA = 4.3 million troops, KIA = 116,708
UK = 6.2 million troops, KIA = 885,138
France = 8.4 million troops, KIA = 1,397,800
Russia = 12 million troops, KIA = 1,811,000
Italy = 5.6 million troops, KIA = 651,010

So as you can see by the figures, the USA contriputed a very small proportion of thier population compared to the other major allied powers. WW1 was so bloody that you can pretty accurately chart how active a nation was by the proportion of troops that died, I hadn't added Romania to the list but they sacrificed more than the USA. In fact the second Germany was pulled into trench warfare they knew that it was inevitable that they would lose, whether the americans fought one battle or not. To put it into perspective the German Empire lost 2 million soldiers in the war, now this nation was one of the main players and of course was there from the start.
Short answer is no the americans did not win world war 1.

Did you actually read my reply?

The USA was in the war for just over 1 year and had go to from a state of peace to one of war so you can hardly use the amount of casualties suffered as an indication of their influence on the war. Also take into account the sheer logistical nightmare of moving a million men from all over the USA to France, training them and equipping them in 1917 when the fastest way of crossing the Atlantic was week long boat trip.

The Americans were not a direct factor in winning the war as they were in WW2 but their entry into the war forced the Germans hand and made them attack in Spring 1918 that failed in it's objectives and allowed the Allies to counter in the summer which drove the Germans back.

The long answer is yes, the Americans were a factor in the Allies winning WW1 and any decent historian and book will tell you the same thing.

 

[yaik7a]

I reckon it's only there because the yanks had to liberate their arses in WW2, then were repaid in snootiness.

I hear the phrase "cheese-eating surrender monkey" was first coined by Willy in the Simpsons.

No Canadians and birtish and the french ristance liberated and could have done it with out
the americans by going therw italy

Whaa?
The French resistance (While brave, Idealistic etc) could not have played a much more major role in the liberation of france, regardless of how hard it had tried. And alone the British and Canadians would not have stood a mayflys chance in hell of beating the Germans.

Without American aid, Britain would have starved.
I hate to say it, as a Brit, but although the Americans may have turned up late, without them we would all be speaking German right now.

Threw the sothern flank and threw sword ,gold and juno of course with Soviets pounding in the
east, italy switching sides and of coarse D day the war might of toke longer but freedom would
have won in the end

 

[dannyboi1236]

Flame wars between the two websites aside, i prefer www.encyclopediadramatica.org to uncyclopedia. Sure, it's got a smaller area of subject matter, is NSFW and possible to scar you for life, but I find the writing funnier, sharper and wittier.

OT: The french do get a lot of stick for surrendering, yet they are a nuclear power AND are a major country in weapons manufacturing. Bread stick that is.

i am with you on the point about ED. as you said they are wittier and can scare you to death. they also have a better understanding of the shit pool that is the internet, and because of this get better content.

 

[Exocet]

What is appalling to me is that some British and Americans are calling French people surrender monkeys because they surrendered in WW2.

The French got the full might of the Blitzkrieg(land forces AND airforce) on multiple fronts(they had colonies in Africa too...) and when they did fall,alot of them joined up with other armies or the Resistance.

In the European theatre,the British "only" fought the German airforce,and while an admirable task that will make me respect the RAF forever,if every other European country fell to the German's advance,The UK would have too.

As for the USA,during both world wars they sat back mass-producing weapons and training soldiers for at least 2 years before even sending soldiers to any theatre.


As for before the 20th century,guess who had the first western European army to get to the gates of Moscow(only the gates though,they got kicked out fast)?
Guess who stopped the Moors from rampaging through Europe and send them back to Spain.
Guess who supplied weapons,gunpowder and troops to the rebelling 13 colonies.

I'll finish my rant on WW1.
Seriously,some of you think they sucked and surrendered during that war?
I'd show you a picture of my great-grandfather serving in Verdun along with thousands of other Frenchmen,but they were too busy fighting Germans,Italians and Ottomans while getting gased and shelled to have their pictures taken.Sorry

 

[Spitfire175]

Wow, thanks for the informative history lesson Spitfire.

No problem. History is my profession and I like writing.

Well, it just good to see a level headed person who knows history to bring this discussion around to the logical side of things.

Glad to be of service.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

Also Napoleon wasn't French, he was Corsican so not sure if they can claim those as true French victories.

In that case, the British never won against Napoleon at Waterloo. The Duke of Wellington was Irish.

 

[Spitfire175]

-snip-

I couldn't have put it better myself, good man.

Also: French tanks have 5 gears: 1 forward and 4 reverse. They also have reaw view mirrors.

 

[JWAN]

I think it was because they surrendered to the Nazis in WW2.
Though people seem to forget about La Resistance and whatnot.

Funnily enough, a nation that once conquered most of Europe itself (under Napoleon) is now stereotyped as a nation of cowards.
Weird, but what can you do... *shrugs*

Where was Napoleon from again?

 

[CorvinBlack]

Because the French are known to abandon their allies through history, for their doubleplay (there is a reason french is considered the language of diplomacy) and for their boisterous nature. Also, that joke, and I mean J-O-K-E is also only known and popular in Anglo-saxon cultures (the only one more arrogant then french).

 

[Skeleon]

Where was Napoleon from again?

It's been said before, I'll say it again: How does that matter?

Hitler was Austrian, does that mean the Austrians invaded Poland and conquered France?!

The French people conquered most of Europe under a Corsican leader.