Devil's Advocate Counterpoint:
Napoléon was Corsican.
That said, the French were pretty awesome for a long time. Their bad reputation is undeserved IMO. I think it was just a joke though, don't take it too seriously!
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Devil's Advocate Counterpoint:
Napoléon was Corsican.
That said, the French were pretty awesome for a long time. Their bad reputation is undeserved IMO. I think it was just a joke though, don't take it too seriously!
We will complain as long as we will be under the autorities of other than ourselves! Now, we go back to the aar plz!
For the devil advocate: Sure he was corsican, raised in France...and the millions french who fought for him and gained the victories are french too!
For the devil advocate: Sure he was corsican, raised in France...and the millions french who fought for him and gained the victories are french too!
:rofl: We can get into a whole Napoleon Complex debate here, especially when we start throwing in 1812 and Waterloo.
So kidding aside, what's the status in the place where there is a gun behind every blade of grass?
So kidding aside, what's the status in the place where there is a gun behind every blade of grass?
In all fairness, the French soldiers are very good ones and usually have been. Historically however, it seems that France has been cursed by bad leaders. The Generals of World War I rank high on that list in my opinion. Not that the British Generals were much better.
I think it fair to point out that when Napoleon was born, Corsica was an independent republic and as I understand it his French when he first went to school was god awful.
That being said if it wasn't for the French history would have unfolded much differently. It was French troops that defeated Muslim invasion wayyyy back in the early middle ages. How you feel about that depends on your opinion of how history worked out. As an American I'm rather a fan of our timeline. I imagine a Iranian, Saudi, Fin or Russian might feel a bit different.
The prejudice about supposed French cowardice is the result of a single war - WW2. I'm pretty sure that before that war, it would never have crossed the mind of any English speaking person to accuse the French, who had been the dominating land power of Europe throughout the last centuries, of having bad soldiers and/or leaders.
This is also a predominantly English-speaking phenomenon - for the Germans, the Italians have become the object of many jokes in a very similair manner. Right down to the assertion that the common Italian soldier might actually have been quite good if it weren't for their leaders.
I'm pretty sure that those prejudices have very little to do with actual combat performance and more with the bitterness felt by a people which had to continue fighting the war while its ally dropped out of it early - passed down the generations. So in this timeline, the British may become the laughing-stock of the Americans - if the US survives, of course.
Also, keep in mind that most of the really atrocious offensive battles of WW1 were caused by British generals while the French were more concerned about their own defense.
The frankish troops of the eight century hardly count as French. That's far too early in this period. The coalition at the battle of Tours consisted of whatever germanic tribes there where to be found in the ruins of the Western Roman Empire and the later split of the Frankish Realm founded both France, the German Holy Roman Empire and the states of Northern Italy.
Is the CSA also at war with Texas and California? If it considers itself the sole legitimate successor to the United States; it probably should be.
100 year war. French-Indian war (your pardon I don't know the French name for it). World War I. These are actually the basis of my opinion. In each of those conflicts the French soldier/warrior preformed not just well but greatly and at high cost. French generals however... To clarify my position I am not accusing the French of cowardice. Anything but! I'm accusing them of bad luck in their leaders, which isn't their fault.
World War II was a bit of a aberration and it's unfair to slap France for it when just about everyone on the continent got gut punched into submission. A good amount of the bitterness in the Anglo world also has roots in the French NATO pullout, but that's not really relevant to the discussion.
I have a number of Norwegian and Russians friends who would be surprised to hear that only us Anglos make French jokes. Although I'm told Czech jokes are common in central Europe.
I can certainly agree with that. I wouldn't say laughing stock though. I would say object of unrelenting hatred. Consider Britain pretty much pulled the US into the war and then abandoned it when the US was knee deep in Europe. This isn't being conquered or pulling out. This is total and complete betrayal. Even the Confeds are unlikely to be fans of the English at this point. Hell, depending on how the civil war goes having an English accent in some parts of the states may be worth your life, literally.
The 700s may indeed be early but frankly as far I am concerned Martel is French enough. Besides which it was the Franks who laid the foundations of France, so why not include them?
Well, to be fair, I remember once reading that during the campaigns in Germany against Napoleon after his defeat in Russia, the allied armies were ordered to deliberatedly seek out French forces lead by generals other than Napoleon himself and decline battle with the emperor under all circumstances...a doctrine which resulted in a long string of victories.
However, I would contest that I doubt that french generals performed any worse (or better) than their average european counterparts during any given war, which is to say that for every battle lost to incompetent or nonexistent leadership I'm pretty certain there exists a british or german counterpart.
Hm, I probably got a wrong impression from the internet as I don't have much experience with Russians. The point I wanted to make was simply that it's likely a country-specific opinion.
They more or less laid the foundations for all of western europe, not only France considers itself to be descendant from them, Germany also regards the Frankish realm as its foundation and the battle of Tours as "their" victory for Christianity. So I think the Franks predate modern nationality a bit (albeit only slightly) and still belong to the period of the decline of the antique empires which consisted of multiple modern nationalities. I'm surely no master historian, though.
It's not only unfair, it's also really irrational. The world expected an exact rematch of WW1 even though
a) Germany this time didn't have to fight a two-front war after the quick take-out of Poland.
b) France had suffered much more under WW1 than Germany and among other things actually fielded a smaller army than in 1914.
c) there was no capacity in allied pre-war planning for any offensive action while nearly all important french industry was concentrated in immediate vicinity to the likely front
How should France have won under those circumstances without extremely devoted British assistance?
Indeed it is
I will be updating today. I was going to try a couple days ago, but work has been exhausting so I've been hitting the bed earlier. Now, it is Friday and I've got no work tomorrow...so means I can stay up later and actually get an update in
As for the side conversation going on...I would love to get into that but I won't. Them French Canadians...
hehehe. Us western Canadians have fun at their expense sometimes. :rofl:
...I"m not french canadian, I'm Québécois. Now, let go back to the AAR
P.S: historical fact: Napoleon was born in corsica AFTER it became part of France.
P.P.S The French name for the french and indian war is Guerre de la Conquête: Conquest War
P.S: historical fact: Napoleon was born in corsica AFTER it became part of France.
P.P.S The French name for the french and indian war is Guerre de la Conquête: Conquest War
French Canadian, Quebecois whats the difference?
Last time I checked, Quebec is in Canada.
I understand the difference precisely. Quebecois is an seperate identity- French Canadian is a compartmentalisation within a country this particular Quebecois wishes Quebec had no unity with. And I can symphasise- why antagonize him by pointing out it remains in Canada?
Quebec may be free in our lifetimes. I hope so- North America's bloated countries could do worse than see the rise of nation states on this continent.
Quebec may be free in our lifetimes. I hope so- North America's bloated countries could do worse than see the rise of nation states on this continent.
On that we will have to agree to disagree. I see no reason to divide up the United States into petty quarreling nations based on something as foolish as ethnic background. I've read enough history to see what that did for the Euros thank you. Whatever Canada choses for itself, may the United States remain one and indivisible... Unlike this AAR.
As to Quebec, I have no opinion, although some of the comments I've heard like the screaming that it was the Ethnic Vote that defeated Quebec's independence make me look a bit cross eyed at them.
Firestorm, I hope you're aiming for the enemies IC... Take out their factories and they can't fight for long.
Ok ok, stop, I don't want to pollute the best AAR in years by debatting on Québec Independance. But anyone who want to, my PM box wait for you!
I understand the difference precisely. Quebecois is an seperate identity- French Canadian is a compartmentalisation within a country this particular Quebecois wishes Quebec had no unity with. And I can symphasise- why antagonize him by pointing out it remains in Canada?
Quebec may be free in our lifetimes. I hope so- North America's bloated countries could do worse than see the rise of nation states on this continent.
Well thats because the vast majority of Canada and USA are white and speak english, not many divisions exist serious enough to destroy territorial integrity.
BBC Home and Forces Program – October 7th, 1953
October 7th, 1953
BBC Home and Forces Program
"This is the BBC home and forces program. This is Bruce Belfrage. The Confederate States of America has continued to push for its legitimacy on the international stage. Following last week's recognitions from the European Axis powers, the South American powers followed suit. Argentina has taken it a step further, however, and has placed an economic embargo on the former United States. In addition to this, Vichy France has turned over a large portion of captured equipment to the Confederacy. This equipment is rumored to have been released by Germany for this specific purpose, as Germany claimed last month that it would not support the Confederate states directly."
"The regional Texas and Californian governments have found themselves in an awkward position. The recent show of support by the Soviet Union has left them in a strange and interesting scenario. Both governments are fascist, but are getting support from Communist states to wage war against a fascist Confederacy. How the international governments react to this strange occurrence has yet to be seen. The Soviet Union, however, claimed that '...it is a step forward in the right direction. The post-war world should not be at odds due to differences in policy. It should show cooperation and assistance, despite political background. We are willing to take this step forward, to set forth in new political territory, and we hope to lead by example..." Despite the speech, some suspect the Soviets to use this situation to gain Axis support for the war against China and Japan."
"In Canada, the government forces have claimed victory over the Quebec separatist forces. Due to the massive damaged sustained to Ottawa and the continued unrest in the region, the government has moved to the Albertan city of Edmonton, where it will continue operations from relative peace."
**All separatists states got a boost in army. The Confederates got the largest boost, which contained a larger portion of cavalry compared to the rest. I have some tough battles ahead...I had to paradrop onto Chicago to save it. Funny thing is...saving the paratroopers from Spain proved one of the most fluke beneficial things of the war. I now have a mobile army, able to strike and move with some ease.**
October 7th, 1953
BBC Home and Forces Program
"This is the BBC home and forces program. This is Bruce Belfrage. The Confederate States of America has continued to push for its legitimacy on the international stage. Following last week's recognitions from the European Axis powers, the South American powers followed suit. Argentina has taken it a step further, however, and has placed an economic embargo on the former United States. In addition to this, Vichy France has turned over a large portion of captured equipment to the Confederacy. This equipment is rumored to have been released by Germany for this specific purpose, as Germany claimed last month that it would not support the Confederate states directly."
"The regional Texas and Californian governments have found themselves in an awkward position. The recent show of support by the Soviet Union has left them in a strange and interesting scenario. Both governments are fascist, but are getting support from Communist states to wage war against a fascist Confederacy. How the international governments react to this strange occurrence has yet to be seen. The Soviet Union, however, claimed that '...it is a step forward in the right direction. The post-war world should not be at odds due to differences in policy. It should show cooperation and assistance, despite political background. We are willing to take this step forward, to set forth in new political territory, and we hope to lead by example..." Despite the speech, some suspect the Soviets to use this situation to gain Axis support for the war against China and Japan."
"In Canada, the government forces have claimed victory over the Quebec separatist forces. Due to the massive damaged sustained to Ottawa and the continued unrest in the region, the government has moved to the Albertan city of Edmonton, where it will continue operations from relative peace."
**All separatists states got a boost in army. The Confederates got the largest boost, which contained a larger portion of cavalry compared to the rest. I have some tough battles ahead...I had to paradrop onto Chicago to save it. Funny thing is...saving the paratroopers from Spain proved one of the most fluke beneficial things of the war. I now have a mobile army, able to strike and move with some ease.**
I'm not sure if I should provide advice, but I don't think that BBC would use the term 'Fascistic' considering how it is an Axis supporter now. It wasn't really used during the war in reference to other nation's except by the Soviet's.
(In real life I mean)
(In real life I mean)