RE: How's it all playing in France itself? (was IRAQ? Not exactly about it...)

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Fri Feb 21 2003 - 21:43:00 MST

  • Next message: gts: "RE: Hackers please help"

    Mike Lorrey writes

    > [Spike wrote]
    > > I have noticed lately on Leno, Letterman etc that France
    > > is the butt of all the jokes. To this I object. France
    > > should be the butt of only those jokes which involve an
    > > actual country.
    >
    > Nah. When I think of butts, I automatically picture a beady eyed beret
    > clad fellow with a thin moustache and a sneer. Besides, there is so
    > much more than just the country to make jokes about: their military,
    > for instance,

    I think that the bad reputation of the French military
    is mostly undeserved. Their biggest mistakes are
    usually said to be

       * losing to the Germans in 1870, a fiasco
         of Napoleon III
       * the quick defeat in WWII by the Germans
       * Dien Bien Phu

    The latter was just quite difficult, and a nation ten
    years later---and with much more advanced fire power
    ---cannot be said to have had an easy time in a far
    away country in Indochina either.

    France's inferiority to Germany during 1850 - 1950
    is mostly attributable to the 3 to 2 numerical
    superiority of the Germans.

    But it's World War II that every one thinks about when
    they sneer at the French. Well, know this: when war
    was declared in September of 1939, France put

       FOUR MILLION MEN

    on the line against Germany. That was one-tenth of
    their population. (It took the U.S. several years to
    mobilize to that degree.) Moreover, most of the French
    units were first rate. Individually, they even had
    better tanks than the Germans. But neither the units
    nor the tanks got much of a chance to fight because
    after the Ardennes breakthrough, the situation was
    hopeless strategically.

    Yes, there was Vichy, and the generalship in World War
    Two wasn't good. But they fought quite well in the first
    world war. I'll also concede the truth that their
    methods and strategy (perhaps by bad luck) did overly
    absorb the lessons of an earlier war, and failed to
    be properly innovative.

    Lee



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 21 2003 - 21:39:39 MST