‘Cheese-eating surrender monkeys’? It’s time to give the French Army the credit it deserves

[Vergennes]

Against the odds: French troops throw rocks at advancing German troops in the Vosges, 1916. PA Images

When marking the centenary of the terrible events of 1917, some of the most devastating of World War I, it is perhaps understandable that the British have focused their attention on the Passchendaele offensive and the Americans on their entry into the war against Germany. Unfortunately, their desire to commemorate the heroism of their own service personnel often has an ugly flip-side: the denigration of the courage and skill of their French allies.

This attitude is best captured in the phrase “cheese-eating surrender monkeys”, coined in a 1995 episode of The Simpsons and popularised by journalist Jonah Goldberg in a 1999 column for The National Review. It suggested, among other things, that the French “surrendered Paris to the Germans [in 1940] without firing a shot”.

Doubtless the piece was satirical in intent, but the seriousness of the underlying prejudice became all too obvious in 2003; witness the invective directed at the French by US and British politicians and media following France’s (retrospectively, wise) decision not to support military intervention in Iraq.

If the British and Americans are serious about remembrance, then let’s remember France’s military performance fairly.

Be fair on the French

From August 1914 to early 1917, it was the French Army that bore the brunt of the fighting on the Western Front – and with astonishing stoicism. In one two-week period – August 16-31, 1914 – they suffered 210,993 casualties. By comparison, British casualties numbered 164,709 in the opening month – July 1916 – of the Somme offensive.

The French Army also adapted effectively to the challenges of trench warfare, perfecting artillery “barrage” fire and pioneering innovative platoon-level infantry tactics, centred on automatic weapons and rifle grenades. While the first day of the Somme – July 1, 1916 – was a disaster for the British, the French took all of their objectives.

French troops receive mail in their trench during World War I. PA Images

In early 1917, 68 French divisions suffered mutinies. But the soldiers taking part in what were effectively military strikes neither refused to defend their trenches nor abandoned France’s war aims. The army itself rallied magnificently from this near collapse and played a pivotal role in the Allied victory of 1918. From July to November 1918, French troops captured 139,000 German prisoners. In the same period, the American Expeditionary Force captured 44,142 Germans.

In the interwar years, the French invested heavily in massive defensive fortifications, the Maginot Line, along the Franco-German frontier. This decision has often been derided as indicative of a defeatist attitude. Yet France had a smaller population than Germany and could not hope to match its field army in size. Fortresses could make good the deficiency. The key point of the Maginot Line was to protect France’s industrial heartland from a rapid German offensive and funnel a German invasion through Belgium. It worked.

The German Army won the ensuing campaign in May and June 1940, through its audacious “sickle cut” through the Ardennes Forest, which was thought impassable by Allied commanders. This cut off the British, French and Belgian armies to the north and doomed them to defeat.

French strategic planning must bear much of the blame for this catastrophe, yet this was an Allied defeat, not simply a French one. The Dutch and Belgians had been reluctant to risk their neutrality and so there was little coordination before the Germans struck. And the British clearly assumed that France was to bear the main brunt of any land fighting.

The British Expeditionary Force of 1940 had a maximum strength of just 12 divisions. In 1918, it had numbered 59. Small wonder that the Nazi propaganda machine used to taunt their enemies with claims that the British were “determined to fight to the last Frenchman”.

The Dunkirk ‘miracle’

Although their generals were outclassed in 1940, French troops fought courageously and skilfully. For example, at the Battle of Gembloux – May 14-15, 1940 – elements of the French First Army checked the vaunted German “Blitzkrieg” and won enough time for their comrades and allies to withdraw. Without such tenacious rearguard actions, there would have been no “Miracle of Dunkirk” and the war might have been lost in 1940.

Having crossed the Meuse River, the German Panzer divisions only had to advance 150 miles to the Channel coast to trap the bulk of the Allied forces – 1.8m French soldiers were captured, and 90,000 killed or wounded.

In the opening phase of Operation Barbarossa, the German invasion of the Soviet Union the following year, the Red Army suffered nearly 5m casualties, including 2.5m who surrendered. The Russians also lost 600,000 square miles of territory. Yet, as Charles De Gaulle observed to Stalin, in the aftermath of this colossal defeat, the Soviets still had 5,000 miles of Eurasia into which they could retreat. The French did not lack courage in 1940; they lacked space.

The French military contribution to Allied victory in World War II did not end in 1940. There were 550,000 Free French soldiers under arms in 1944 and they made a major contribution to the liberation of Western Europe. In particular, Operation Dragoon – the invasion of southern France in August 1944 – was effectively a Franco-American operation, with limited British involvement.

Many of the French soldiers involved were recruited in France’s African colonies, but this was no different to the British reliance on 2.6m Indian soldiers to support their empire’s global war effort. By all accounts, the French units serving in Italy and Western Europe between 1943 and 1945, fought well, in the best traditions of the French Army.

Cheese-eating surrender monkeys? It’s time to think again.


https://theconversation.com/cheese-...-the-french-army-the-credit-it-deserves-81853

@flamer84 @AUSTERLITZ @Nilgiri @Kaptaan @Penguin

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Against the odds: French troops throw rocks at advancing German troops in the Vosges, 1916. PA Images

When marking the centenary of the terrible events of 1917, some of the most devastating of World War I, it is perhaps understandable that the British have focused their attention on the Passchendaele offensive and the Americans on their entry into the war against Germany. Unfortunately, their desire to commemorate the heroism of their own service personnel often has an ugly flip-side: the denigration of the courage and skill of their French allies.

This attitude is best captured in the phrase “cheese-eating surrender monkeys”, coined in a 1995 episode of The Simpsons and popularised by journalist Jonah Goldberg in a 1999 column for The National Review. It suggested, among other things, that the French “surrendered Paris to the Germans [in 1940] without firing a shot”.

Doubtless the piece was satirical in intent, but the seriousness of the underlying prejudice became all too obvious in 2003; witness the invective directed at the French by US and British politicians and media following France’s (retrospectively, wise) decision not to support military intervention in Iraq.

If the British and Americans are serious about remembrance, then let’s remember France’s military performance fairly.

Be fair on the French

From August 1914 to early 1917, it was the French Army that bore the brunt of the fighting on the Western Front – and with astonishing stoicism. In one two-week period – August 16-31, 1914 – they suffered 210,993 casualties. By comparison, British casualties numbered 164,709 in the opening month – July 1916 – of the Somme offensive.

The French Army also adapted effectively to the challenges of trench warfare, perfecting artillery “barrage” fire and pioneering innovative platoon-level infantry tactics, centred on automatic weapons and rifle grenades. While the first day of the Somme – July 1, 1916 – was a disaster for the British, the French took all of their objectives.

French troops receive mail in their trench during World War I. PA Images

In early 1917, 68 French divisions suffered mutinies. But the soldiers taking part in what were effectively military strikes neither refused to defend their trenches nor abandoned France’s war aims. The army itself rallied magnificently from this near collapse and played a pivotal role in the Allied victory of 1918. From July to November 1918, French troops captured 139,000 German prisoners. In the same period, the American Expeditionary Force captured 44,142 Germans.

In the interwar years, the French invested heavily in massive defensive fortifications, the Maginot Line, along the Franco-German frontier. This decision has often been derided as indicative of a defeatist attitude. Yet France had a smaller population than Germany and could not hope to match its field army in size. Fortresses could make good the deficiency. The key point of the Maginot Line was to protect France’s industrial heartland from a rapid German offensive and funnel a German invasion through Belgium. It worked.

The German Army won the ensuing campaign in May and June 1940, through its audacious “sickle cut” through the Ardennes Forest, which was thought impassable by Allied commanders. This cut off the British, French and Belgian armies to the north and doomed them to defeat.

French strategic planning must bear much of the blame for this catastrophe, yet this was an Allied defeat, not simply a French one. The Dutch and Belgians had been reluctant to risk their neutrality and so there was little coordination before the Germans struck. And the British clearly assumed that France was to bear the main brunt of any land fighting.

The British Expeditionary Force of 1940 had a maximum strength of just 12 divisions. In 1918, it had numbered 59. Small wonder that the Nazi propaganda machine used to taunt their enemies with claims that the British were “determined to fight to the last Frenchman”.

The Dunkirk ‘miracle’

Although their generals were outclassed in 1940, French troops fought courageously and skilfully. For example, at the Battle of Gembloux – May 14-15, 1940 – elements of the French First Army checked the vaunted German “Blitzkrieg” and won enough time for their comrades and allies to withdraw. Without such tenacious rearguard actions, there would have been no “Miracle of Dunkirk” and the war might have been lost in 1940.

Having crossed the Meuse River, the German Panzer divisions only had to advance 150 miles to the Channel coast to trap the bulk of the Allied forces – 1.8m French soldiers were captured, and 90,000 killed or wounded.

In the opening phase of Operation Barbarossa, the German invasion of the Soviet Union the following year, the Red Army suffered nearly 5m casualties, including 2.5m who surrendered. The Russians also lost 600,000 square miles of territory. Yet, as Charles De Gaulle observed to Stalin, in the aftermath of this colossal defeat, the Soviets still had 5,000 miles of Eurasia into which they could retreat. The French did not lack courage in 1940; they lacked space.

The French military contribution to Allied victory in World War II did not end in 1940. There were 550,000 Free French soldiers under arms in 1944 and they made a major contribution to the liberation of Western Europe. In particular, Operation Dragoon – the invasion of southern France in August 1944 – was effectively a Franco-American operation, with limited British involvement.

Many of the French soldiers involved were recruited in France’s African colonies, but this was no different to the British reliance on 2.6m Indian soldiers to support their empire’s global war effort. By all accounts, the French units serving in Italy and Western Europe between 1943 and 1945, fought well, in the best traditions of the French Army.

Cheese-eating surrender monkeys? It’s time to think again.


https://theconversation.com/cheese-...-the-french-army-the-credit-it-deserves-81853

@flamer84 @AUSTERLITZ @Nilgiri @Kaptaan @Penguin

Spent quite a lot of time when I was a kid building Scale Models and painting small plastic armies.

The Napoleonic French soldiers were my favourite.
Had hundreds of these eventually.

Which looked like this after painting.

The Carabiners-a-Chêval were my favourite, but had to be customized, since they were not available from Airfix.

Unfortunately someone ended up like this at Waterloo! Saw this cuirass when I visited Paris.

Still, I remember when we had a week of training, and one evening was spent on paintball in the forest. About half-way, the two Frenchmen had enough, and retired.
I had to make this comment (with a smile): "La Garde Recule!"

Their shoulders shrank visibly...

 

[Vergennes]

Still, I remember when we had a week of training, and one evening was spent on paintball in the forest. About half-way, the two Frenchmen had enough, and retired.
I had to make this comment (with a smile): "La Garde Recule!"

Their shoulders shrank visibly...

I'm offensive and I find this French !

 

[wiseone2]

Against the odds: French troops throw rocks at advancing German troops in the Vosges, 1916. PA Images

When marking the centenary of the terrible events of 1917, some of the most devastating of World War I, it is perhaps understandable that the British have focused their attention on the Passchendaele offensive and the Americans on their entry into the war against Germany. Unfortunately, their desire to commemorate the heroism of their own service personnel often has an ugly flip-side: the denigration of the courage and skill of their French allies.

This attitude is best captured in the phrase “cheese-eating surrender monkeys”, coined in a 1995 episode of The Simpsons and popularised by journalist Jonah Goldberg in a 1999 column for The National Review. It suggested, among other things, that the French “surrendered Paris to the Germans [in 1940] without firing a shot”.

Doubtless the piece was satirical in intent, but the seriousness of the underlying prejudice became all too obvious in 2003; witness the invective directed at the French by US and British politicians and media following France’s (retrospectively, wise) decision not to support military intervention in Iraq.

If the British and Americans are serious about remembrance, then let’s remember France’s military performance fairly.

Be fair on the French

From August 1914 to early 1917, it was the French Army that bore the brunt of the fighting on the Western Front – and with astonishing stoicism. In one two-week period – August 16-31, 1914 – they suffered 210,993 casualties. By comparison, British casualties numbered 164,709 in the opening month – July 1916 – of the Somme offensive.

The French Army also adapted effectively to the challenges of trench warfare, perfecting artillery “barrage” fire and pioneering innovative platoon-level infantry tactics, centred on automatic weapons and rifle grenades. While the first day of the Somme – July 1, 1916 – was a disaster for the British, the French took all of their objectives.

French troops receive mail in their trench during World War I. PA Images

In early 1917, 68 French divisions suffered mutinies. But the soldiers taking part in what were effectively military strikes neither refused to defend their trenches nor abandoned France’s war aims. The army itself rallied magnificently from this near collapse and played a pivotal role in the Allied victory of 1918. From July to November 1918, French troops captured 139,000 German prisoners. In the same period, the American Expeditionary Force captured 44,142 Germans.

In the interwar years, the French invested heavily in massive defensive fortifications, the Maginot Line, along the Franco-German frontier. This decision has often been derided as indicative of a defeatist attitude. Yet France had a smaller population than Germany and could not hope to match its field army in size. Fortresses could make good the deficiency. The key point of the Maginot Line was to protect France’s industrial heartland from a rapid German offensive and funnel a German invasion through Belgium. It worked.

The German Army won the ensuing campaign in May and June 1940, through its audacious “sickle cut” through the Ardennes Forest, which was thought impassable by Allied commanders. This cut off the British, French and Belgian armies to the north and doomed them to defeat.

French strategic planning must bear much of the blame for this catastrophe, yet this was an Allied defeat, not simply a French one. The Dutch and Belgians had been reluctant to risk their neutrality and so there was little coordination before the Germans struck. And the British clearly assumed that France was to bear the main brunt of any land fighting.

The British Expeditionary Force of 1940 had a maximum strength of just 12 divisions. In 1918, it had numbered 59. Small wonder that the Nazi propaganda machine used to taunt their enemies with claims that the British were “determined to fight to the last Frenchman”.

The Dunkirk ‘miracle’

Although their generals were outclassed in 1940, French troops fought courageously and skilfully. For example, at the Battle of Gembloux – May 14-15, 1940 – elements of the French First Army checked the vaunted German “Blitzkrieg” and won enough time for their comrades and allies to withdraw. Without such tenacious rearguard actions, there would have been no “Miracle of Dunkirk” and the war might have been lost in 1940.

Having crossed the Meuse River, the German Panzer divisions only had to advance 150 miles to the Channel coast to trap the bulk of the Allied forces – 1.8m French soldiers were captured, and 90,000 killed or wounded.

In the opening phase of Operation Barbarossa, the German invasion of the Soviet Union the following year, the Red Army suffered nearly 5m casualties, including 2.5m who surrendered. The Russians also lost 600,000 square miles of territory. Yet, as Charles De Gaulle observed to Stalin, in the aftermath of this colossal defeat, the Soviets still had 5,000 miles of Eurasia into which they could retreat. The French did not lack courage in 1940; they lacked space.

The French military contribution to Allied victory in World War II did not end in 1940. There were 550,000 Free French soldiers under arms in 1944 and they made a major contribution to the liberation of Western Europe. In particular, Operation Dragoon – the invasion of southern France in August 1944 – was effectively a Franco-American operation, with limited British involvement.

Many of the French soldiers involved were recruited in France’s African colonies, but this was no different to the British reliance on 2.6m Indian soldiers to support their empire’s global war effort. By all accounts, the French units serving in Italy and Western Europe between 1943 and 1945, fought well, in the best traditions of the French Army.

Cheese-eating surrender monkeys? It’s time to think again.


https://theconversation.com/cheese-...-the-french-army-the-credit-it-deserves-81853

@flamer84 @AUSTERLITZ @Nilgiri @Kaptaan @Penguin

maybe french are not bad. they are not the elite after napoleon

 

[Indus Pakistan]

At a serious historical level there is no basis to comments some people make about French Army. We know the history of Napoloen's Grande Armée. Hoewever it's one of those untruths that have become common perception and won't go away. The sacrifices of the French Army in WW1 were incredible.

 

[YeBeWarned]

At a serious historical level there is no basis to comments some people make about French Army. We know the history of Napoloen's Grande Armée. Hoewever it's one of those untruths that have become common perception and won't go away. The sacrifices of the French Army in WW1 were incredible.

they give the Germans tough time in Paris and Coastal Lines before Retreating .. i wont call them coward because they took a step back just to make a leap forward .. but no Doubt the NAZI's were better than anyone when it comes military Tactics ..

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

The french were historically throughout formidable soldiers.

The ancient gauls despite their primitive technology and tribal organization were feared greatly,they sacked rome,they sacked the temple of delphi as far as greece.They raided and settled as far as asia minor and spain(modern day turkey).Caesar who finally conquered them considered them his most redoubtable opponents.Caesar said -''An united gaul, animated by one spirit will defy the world''.

The norman army that conquered england in 1066 was essentially french.
They defeated the hitherto unstoppable muslim arabs who had overran spain under charles martel at tours in 732.A major component of charlemagne's armies.(the last united franco-german empire of sorts)
1202 battle of bouvines french army defeated the combined armies of flanders,holy roman empire and england -the greatest powers in western europe at that time.
Bulk of the best knights in the crusades came from france,including the ranks of the knights templar.Infact the saracen muslims called the crusaders 'franj'.France was considered the flower of european chivalry.
From 1350s for next century or so we see many disasters for french knights using the simple frontal charge against english longbows behind stakes -crecy,poitiers,agincourt and the turks at nicopolis using similar tactics with cavalry mixed in.But they came back under joan of arc and won the 100 yrs war and drove out england and conquered burgundy later.

From 1495 they repeatedly invaded italy with fluctuating success ,french artillery was the best in europe and forced the construction oif new star fort designs after old castles were decimated in days by french cannons in italy.During this era they remained only the 2nd most powerful country in europe ,repeatedly challenging the spanish in the habsburg valois wars.While the spanish won due to their enormous wealth from america and the dreaded tercio infantry and were able to expell france from italy,they couldn't take french territory proper.

After that there is a lull due to a prolonged period of wars of religion within france and recovery.
France defeated spain and emerged as preminent great power in europe at rocroi in 1643 under conde.By the 1660s under louis xiv france was the superpowerof europe.Between 1660s-1700 they expanded in all directions and won almost everywhere they fought.Finally they were contained in the war of spanish succession from 1704-1714 ,and only by two legendary commanders - marlborough and eugene(who also shattered ottoman power in the east).

Mid 18th century largely a period of decline for france internally,lost colonial wars ,especially canada and india to the british due to insufficient support from home.Lost to fredericks' prussians in seven years war.
Took revenge against the british in the american revolution in 1770s.Doubtful whether american revolution would have succeeded without french help in soldiers and arms.Without the victory and blockade of the french fleet at yorktown there would be no british surrender.(The americans returned the favour in the 2 world wars though)

Revolutionary wars - Held off all of europe by itself.
Napoleonic wars - no need to say much.
Wars of italian unification - No chance of italian unification without french battlefield victories over the austrians.

Lost franco-prussian war of 1871.With unification of germany lost the position of the grand nation of europe.By 1900 germany had twice the population and far greater industrial capacity due to the ruhr.

French army was single most important factor in allied victory.Verdun is second only to stalingrad in scale of casualities and brutality in a battle in history.

2nd world war is what most depictions of french are based on - but the fact is the british were equally easily crushed by the germans and if not for the channel and the RAF would have met the same fate.The russians suffered catastrophic losses too,but were able to recover due to strategic space to trade for time,manpower reserves and industrial capacity which french didn't have.Their national unity was very low with coalition governments and total administrative paralysis throughout 1930s.

If you see overall french military record is very impressive.When they lost,they lost spectacularly.But victories are much more in number and chronicled over a millenium.Napoleon said about the french that between liberty,equality and fraternity they wanted equality most,the illusion of liberty and above all the french character desired an outlet for its vanity.He said the curious thing about the french is that 'they could neither tolerate tyranny,nor endure liberty'.

 

[Nilgiri]

The french were historically throughout formidable soldiers.

The ancient gauls despite their primitive technology and tribal organization were feared greatly,they sacked rome,they sacked the temple of delphi as far as greece.They raided and settled as far as asia minor and spain(modern day turkey).Caesar who finally conquered them considered them his most redoubtable opponents.Caesar said -''An united gaul, animated by one spirit will defy the world''.

The norman army that conquered england in 1066 was essentially french.
They defeated the hitherto unstoppable muslim arabs who had overran spain under charles martel at tours in 732.A major component of charlemagne's armies.(the last united franco-german empire of sorts)
1202 battle of bouvines french army defeated the combined armies of flanders,holy roman empire and england -the greatest powers in western europe at that time.
Bulk of the best knights in the crusades came from france,including the ranks of the knights templar.Infact the saracen muslims called the crusaders 'franj'.France was considered the flower of european chivalry.
From 1350s for next century or so we see many disasters for french knights using the simple frontal charge against english longbows behind stakes -crecy,poitiers,agincourt and the turks at nicopolis using similar tactics with cavalry mixed in.But they came back under joan of arc and won the 100 yrs war and drove out england and conquered burgundy later.

From 1495 they repeatedly invaded italy with fluctuating success ,french artillery was the best in europe and forced the construction oif new star fort designs after old castles were decimated in days by french cannons in italy.During this era they remained only the 2nd most powerful country in europe ,repeatedly challenging the spanish in the habsburg valois wars.While the spanish won due to their enormous wealth from america and the dreaded tercio infantry and were able to expell france from italy,they couldn't take french territory proper.

After that there is a lull due to a prolonged period of wars of religion within france and recovery.
France defeated spain and emerged as preminent great power in europe at rocroi in 1643 under conde.By the 1660s under louis xiv france was the superpowerof europe.Between 1660s-1700 they expanded in all directions and won almost everywhere they fought.Finally they were contained in the war of spanish succession from 1704-1714 ,and only by two legendary commanders - marlborough and eugene(who also shattered ottoman power in the east).

Mid 18th century largely a period of decline for france internally,lost colonial wars ,especially canada and india to the british due to insufficient support from home.Lost to fredericks' prussians in seven years war.
Took revenge against the british in the american revolution in 1770s.Doubtful whether american revolution would have succeeded without french help in soldiers and arms.Without the victory and blockade of the french fleet at yorktown there would be no british surrender.(The americans returned the favour in the 2 world wars though)

Revolutionary wars - Held off all of europe by itself.
Napoleonic wars - no need to say much.
Wars of italian unification - No chance of italian unification without french battlefield victories over the austrians.

Lost franco-prussian war of 1871.With unification of germany lost the position of the grand nation of europe.By 1900 germany had twice the population and far greater industrial capacity due to the ruhr.

French army was single most important factor in allied victory.Verdun is second only to stalingrad in scale of casualities and brutality in a battle in history.

2nd world war is what most depictions of french are based on - but the fact is the british were equally easily crushed by the germans and if not for the channel and the RAF would have met the same fate.The russians suffered catastrophic losses too,but were able to recover due to strategic space to trade for time,manpower reserves and industrial capacity which french didn't have.Their national unity was very low with coalition governments and total administrative paralysis throughout 1930s.

If you see overall french military record is very impressive.When they lost,they lost spectacularly.But victories are much more in number and chronicled over a millenium.Napoleon said about the french that between liberty,equality and fraternity they wanted equality most,the illusion of liberty and above all the french character desired an outlet for its vanity.He said the curious thing about the french is that 'they could neither tolerate tyranny,nor endure liberty'.

Loved this post

 

[Penguin]

I'm offensive and I find this French !

 

[Vergennes]

 

[Penguin]

View attachment 422092

 

[Vergennes]

There's something better than wine in Holland. ( ͡◉ ͜ʖ ͡◉)

 

[Penguin]

There's something better than wine in Holland. ( ͡◉ ͜ʖ ͡◉)

I beg to differ that's better ;-)