BF2S Forums French Soldiers

Stratocaster wrote:

Didn't know rednecks had internet access....

Yea, A lot of em do :-(

Major_Spittle wrote:

Nazi's Better tactically, yeh they were real genuises????

Well yeah, they were.  At the time the Blitzkrieg tactics were quite revolutionary.  In addition to the Panzers, U-boats wreaked havoc in the Atlantic and the Luftwaffe was nothing to scoff at.  The decision to attack Russia was more political than anything; it didn't really have anything to do with the military.

I agree France sucks.  Military stregnth may not sound like a peacenik way of of measuring things, but unfortunately up until now might makes right. 
The Germans in WWII were gamblers, and died a gamblers death (losing everything).  Had the French not rushed into Belgium (the country that was said would be the out of bounds for the French in the hypothetical map) the history of WWII might have been drastically different. 
The French have won a war more recently than one would think.  In 1956 they along with Israel and the UK invaded the Suez.  True they had help and the Israelis did a lot of the footwork... but at no point were they occupied and had to be helped out. 

France sucks because they hated us first.  No really, they did.  They have consistently tried to follow the "Third Way" since the end of WWII.  They didn't want to be allied with the US or with the Soviets.  Now that the Soviets are gone, they are tirelessly working to balance our power.  Remember, Europe was the birthing ground for power games.

I think USA rocks because even when we do invade a place like Iraq unprovoked, we let it go.  By all ancient rights of conquest we should still occupy France today.  It doesn't matter if you are invading a place that has already been invaded, the ancient "right" of conquest goes way back. 

Remember what the Frenchies and the Brits do when they invade places?  The Brits have a habit of hiring locals to do the dirty work for them and magically ending up on top in the end.  The French have tried to match the Brits but never could. 

Anyway in summation, screw France.

herrr_smity wrote:

WormGuts wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

good point but guderian and manteins were released of command for questioning Hitlers orders

So...you're saying they were genius's?

yes if they had commanded the way they wanted to Germany wold have won the war

and pigs can fly too.this is the most ridiculous statement about ww2 i have ever seen that doesnt involve claims the holocaust didnt happen.your army was being led by a man who relied on astrological readings to make decisions.you had some good generals yes,but saying these men would have led germany to victory against the rest of the free world is just pure fantasy.

pokerplaya wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

WormGuts wrote:

So...you're saying they were genius's?

yes if they had commanded the way they wanted to Germany wold have won the war

and pigs can fly too.this is the most ridiculous statement about ww2 i have ever seen that doesnt involve claims the holocaust didnt happen.your army was being led by a man who relied on astrological readings to make decisions.you had some good generals yes,but saying these men would have led germany to victory against the rest of the free world is just pure fantasy.

Read "Stalingrad" and be enlightened. please. >.<

w00tson wrote:

pokerplaya wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

yes if they had commanded the way they wanted to Germany wold have won the war

and pigs can fly too.this is the most ridiculous statement about ww2 i have ever seen that doesnt involve claims the holocaust didnt happen.your army was being led by a man who relied on astrological readings to make decisions.you had some good generals yes,but saying these men would have led germany to victory against the rest of the free world is just pure fantasy.

Read "Stalingrad" and be enlightened. please. >.<

how can 1 book enlighten me.i have the view that only someone who nows all is truly enlightened.even if his quote about the war referred to the battle of stalingrad its wrong on many fronts.ok germany takes stalingrad then what?onwards to moscow?when its supply lines were already virtually nonexistant.i dont see your point.russia would have never surrendered.i think you need to read a lot more than come back with some points for debate.

I'm not going to even go completely into the matter.  Half of you here have no clue W.T.F. you're talking about, I bet none of you have ever been to France (I've been there twice).  I bet half of you don't even give a rats ass at traveling to another country

You'd be surprised at how much they respect Americans (they respect us a lot).  Remember, unless it's too complicated for you to remember this, that governments and people are different.  It's also funny how much the right wing can criticize the French for being ungrateful, pussies, etc. and yet hardly of you have ever bothered to read a book about France during World War 2, World War 1, the American Revolution, etc.

By the way ...... 20 years from now we will be look at the Iraq war as a huge mistake, and it will be as infamous as the Vietnam war.  Mark my words.  /rant at that

P.S.  how the hell (and why) was this allowed to be posted under Euro Force?  EU is one united force, and I think they should move this thread to the BF2- Complain, because this guy is simply bitching because they have a French assault rifle for the medic kit

Last edited by Spearhead (2006-03-07 21:54:27)

herrr_smity wrote:

lol at you that one of the most stupid things i have ever read. learn a ting or two about ww2 history the french weren't alone the Brits were there to they faced an enemy better tactically and materially.
read some history

I got some advice, FIND THE GOD DAMN COMMA!  AND END YOUR FUCKING SENTENCES YOU UNEDUCATED PIECE OF SHIT...

...look im sorry i called you a piece of shit, im at work and watching Anger Management, kinda got me riled up...again i apologize.  But yes you should find the comma.

d3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

lol at you that one of the most stupid things i have ever read. learn a ting or two about ww2 history the french weren't alone the Brits were there to they faced an enemy better tactically and materially.
read some history

I got some advice, FIND THE GOD DAMN COMMA!  AND END YOUR FUCKING SENTENCES YOU UNEDUCATED PIECE OF SHIT...

...look im sorry i called you a piece of shit, im at work and watching Anger Management, kinda got me riled up...again i apologize.  But yes you should find the comma.

More the just a comma, learn how to spell, and use the shift key, you know the one that is below the Enter and/or Caps Lock key.

My whole point was that (despite what smity thinks) the reason France fell so fast was not because Germany was a tactical master mind, but because France had a Jerry Lewis inspired defense set up that could just be gone around. The Majinol Line(sp) was inspired by WWI. A series of trenches and entrenched guns along the border with Germany that didn't protect their flanks, and could not be moved to defend against a mobile Army. France was weak and stupid, Germany was just defeated a couple decades earlier and France let Germany rebuild their country and military in the matter of a few years and kick their asses all over again. And yes, Hitler was the military idiot in charge of that military and his tactics were awe inspiringly stupid. Sure Germany had good officers, but the big decisions were made by Hitler, thus the poor tactics. I do not give a shit about "if Germany would've listened to the good generals", because that did not happen. "IF"s are not what history is based upon. IF Lance Armstrong was French, the French might have one a tour de France recently, but you know what he isn't, just like France isn't known for brave soldiers and citizens being willing to fight to their death to protect their country. You would never see England, Germany, Austria, Russia, or the US just give up like the French did.

I would pity any country that invaded the US. Our citizens are heavily armed and would fight like what history has never before seen.  It would be like Stalingrad, but without the government having to put pistols to peoples heads to get them to attack the enemy.

Enjoy your AMERICAN game, while you complain about us.

pokerplaya wrote:

w00tson wrote:

pokerplaya wrote:

and pigs can fly too.this is the most ridiculous statement about ww2 i have ever seen that doesnt involve claims the holocaust didnt happen.your army was being led by a man who relied on astrological readings to make decisions.you had some good generals yes,but saying these men would have led germany to victory against the rest of the free world is just pure fantasy.

Read "Stalingrad" and be enlightened. please. >.<

how can 1 book enlighten me.i have the view that only someone who nows all is truly enlightened.even if his quote about the war referred to the battle of stalingrad its wrong on many fronts.ok germany takes stalingrad then what?onwards to moscow?when its supply lines were already virtually nonexistant.i dont see your point.russia would have never surrendered.i think you need to read a lot more than come back with some points for debate.

Trust me, this one can truly enlighten YOU: Oxford A-Z of Grammar and Punctuation.

This is the first time I read so much bullshit ! The ones who say "ha ha France suck cuz they always surrender" are fucking ignorant ! Open a History book, please, and you'll see that my country used to be and continue to be among the five more powerful countries in the world !
First, read this : http://www.exile.ru/2003-October-02/war_nerd.html and you'll understand why you "hate" France, cause you're fucking lobotomized ! See what power Internet and the Media have on you. Your grandparents (except if they were disrespectful ) would'nt say "french are pussies" and everyone say this since 2003 and since France refuse to go in Iraq. French punishment for not sending troups ? Yeah, and stupid. A sentence which is good to read :

You guys might want to remember that the French under Napoleon are still the only army ever to have taken all of continental Europe, from Moscow to Madrid. I could keep listing French victories till I had a book. In fact, it's not a bad idea. A nice big hardback, so you could take it to the assholes running all the anti-French-military sites and bash their heads in with it.

And us French, did we even make sites where you could read "ha ha American are the most stupid people in the world and 40% of us don't even know what a GMO is, ha ha". NO. So be respectful and don't talk about something you don't know. Don't describe people by using stereotypes, by using exaggerated, and preconceived description about a certain type of person, group, or society, OK ? French aren't coward and pussies, American aren't ignorant and teamkillers, Mexican aren't lazy, English aren't gay and posh, etc...

Edit:  I just want to say one more thing, if the US did not help out in WW2, everyone, at least in Europe, would be speaking German.

True but only for 1-2 years, because USSR would irremediably beat Germany, and all Europe would become communist, but American surely wouldn't stand that (cuz communist = no trades, no money for US, simplified) (and cause American, before involving their troops in the war, used to hate communists much more than nazis) and invade Europe and WW3 would begin (except if USSR had the Bomb so this would be nuclear war or just a different Cold war than the one we all know). Remember the Marshall thing ? if De Gaulle accept (fortunately he didn't), most European countries would have dollars as currency and EU couldn't be invented.
And remember too : what do most people (in retirement or not) from UK, Netherlands and Germany answer about the question : "what do you hate in France" ? : "The fact I don't live in yet" ? Self-explanatory.

Major_Spittle wrote:

My whole point was that (despite what smity thinks) the reason France fell so fast was not because Germany was a tactical master mind, but because France had a Jerry Lewis inspired defense set up that could just be gone around. The Majinol Line(sp) was inspired by WWI. A series of trenches and entrenched guns along the border with Germany that didn't protect their flanks, and could not be moved to defend against a mobile Army. France was weak and stupid, Germany was just defeated a couple decades earlier and France let Germany rebuild their country and military in the matter of a few years and kick their asses all over again. And yes, Hitler was the military idiot in charge of that military and his tactics were awe inspiringly stupid. Sure Germany had good officers, but the big decisions were made by Hitler, thus the poor tactics. I do not give a shit about "if Germany would've listened to the good generals", because that did not happen. "IF"s are not what history is based upon. IF Lance Armstrong was French, the French might have one a tour de France recently, but you know what he isn't, just like France isn't known for brave soldiers and citizens being willing to fight to their death to protect their country. You would never see England, Germany, Austria, Russia, or the US just give up like the French did.

I would pity any country that invaded the US. Our citizens are heavily armed and would fight like what history has never before seen.  It would be like Stalingrad, but without the government having to put pistols to peoples heads to get them to attack the enemy.

Enjoy your AMERICAN game, while you complain about us.

First:
The Maginot Line was a defense line that was built on the then actual concepts of warfare and tactics.
Mobile forces where a totally new concept that was brought up by the germans. Using armour and tanks as attack units instead of infantry support was a new way. Most of the german tanks where inferior to the french tanks during the invasion, they had less armour and were not even able to penetrate the french tank's armour. It was the famous 88 that was used against them. The german armour had the advantage of speed and was able to cut deep into enemy territory very fast. In fact they where so fast that even Berlin was surprised and had to issue a halt order so that the following infantry was able to catch up and secure the territory the tanks took. Another new concept was the close cooperation between the airforce and the ground troops. Then german tank units where able to call in air to ground support on short notice when they encountered heavy french resistance. The StuKas where able to hit the french tanks. The french tanks were still used as infantry support, several tanks attached to infantry units. The french army was just in the process of building up armoured units with the purpose of working without infantry. The concept of "leading from the front" also was a new thing. The german tank officers andvanced with the units and fought with them instead of staying behind and coordinating the attacks from there. This saved time because of shorter ways of communication (and the german tanks all had radios to communicate as well, where as the french only had radios in the lead tanks most of the time). The faster reaction times in the field helped a lot.

Second:
Of course you know that Hitler broke the treaty of Versailles by rearming Germany. The french wanted to invade prior to the germans gaining too much strength, but the international appeasement policy prevented this, France would have been alone in an attack and would have been the aggressor.
When the other states finally realized that Hitler had managed to build a new 8and at that time technically advanced army) it was already too late to react. France only had the choice of defending their border against the expected attack, so they deployed their forces there. How the heck should they have known that Hitler would invade Belgium and Holland without a declaration of war? How the heck should France have known that neither Belgium nor Holland would be able to defend themselves against the advancing germans?

Where ever the french troops met the germans they gave them a fierce fight. It was only the new tactics and air superiority that enabled the germans to come out as the victor of those fights.
The french tanks where able to do "one-shot kills" against most german tanks. It was the numbers and the cooperation between Luftwaffe, Tanks and Infantry that prevented an onslaught.

I have the highest regards for the french people and french soldiers (now and the ones during WW II). They fought a fight although they knew they were on their own (the British Expeditionary Forces had to retreat at Dunkirchen, remember? Yet no one calls the british soldiers "cowards" or says "They drop their guns and destroy their equipment before swimming home") against a superior enemy. They didn't just roll over and let the germans goose-step towards Paris.

Third:
I wonder how many british and american airmen would have made it back home alive if the "cowardly" french resistance wouldn't have set up a network to get them out of the country or to safe hideouts.
And I wonder how the defeat of Germany would have worked out if the resistance wouldn't have helped the allied forces during the first days of Operation Overlord by destroying supply and communication lines in the back of the new front.

Last but not least:

I for my part enjoy the SWEDISH game of BF2 that is distributed by an american company.

See ya,
vonSteuben