french military victories

ObjSRgtLw

ObjSRgtLw

Active member
Please take the time and do the following:
visit: www.google.com
enter: french military victories
press: "I'm feeling lucky"

see what happens ;)





Yeah well, I'm a nasty Kraut, I know ;)
 
ObjSRgtLw

You do know that the French beat the Germans 2 out of 3 times in the past 150 years? ;-)


I found this through a normal search.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/battles/french_military_victories.asp

If you think about it the French were

The only ones who defeated Julius Caesar (Gergovia)
The only ones who successfully invaded England (Hastings)
The ones who stopped the Muslims from invading Europe (Charles Martel+Charlemagne)
 
Last edited:
mmarsh said:
If you think about it the French were

The only ones who successfully invaded England (Hastings)
Click to expand...

Not quite true, the Normans were "Northmen" or "Norsemen", after the Vikings from Scandinavia who founded Normandy (Northmannia in its original Latin).
 
BritinAfrica said:
Not quite true, the Normans were "Northmen" or "Norsemen", after the Vikings from Scandinavia who founded Normandy (Northmannia in its original Latin).
Click to expand...

Yes, but what is French? All French come from either Vikings or Barbarians. Remember the "French" were in fact the "Franks" a Germanic tribe, whom married into the Gauls after the fall of the Roman Empire. Same with the Normans, They had been living in Normandy (inbreding with the Gauls+Franks) since 880 AD? and Hastings was 200 years later (1066AD). William the Conqueror spoke a French dialect, and in fact French became the language of the English court when he took over the crown. Modern English is derived from old French (Thanks to William), Latin and some Celt. Before the 12th century France was called Frankland. The Dutch today called it FrankRijk.

He is called William of Normandy but he is considered a French Historical figure. William was more French than Napoleon was.
 
Last edited:
mmarsh said:
Yes, but what is French? All French come from either Vikings or Barbarians. Remember the "French" were in fact the "Franks" a Germanic tribe, whom married into the Gauls after the fall of the Roman Empire. Same with the Normans, They had been living in Normandy (inbreding with the Gauls+Franks) since 880 AD? and Hastings was 200 years later (1066AD). William the Conqueror spoke a French dialect, and in fact French became the language of the English court when he took over the crown. Modern English is derived from old French (Thanks to William), Latin and some Celt. Before the 12th century France was called Frankland. The Dutch today called it FrankRijk.

He is called William of Normandy but he is considered a French Historical figure. William was more French than Napoleon was.
Click to expand...

The borders of modern France are approximately the same as those of ancient Gaul, which was inhabited by Celtic Gauls. Gaul was conquered for Rome by Julius Caesar in the 1st century BC, and the Gauls eventually adopted Roman speech (Latin, from which the French language evolved) and Roman culture. Christianity first appeared in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, and became so firmly established by the fourth and fifth centuries that St. Jerome wrote that Gaul was the only region “free from heresy”.

In the 4th century AD, Gaul’s eastern frontier along the Rhine was overrun by Germanic tribes, principally the Franks, from whom the ancient name of “Francie” was derived. The modern name “France” derives from the name of the feudal domain of the Capetian Kings of France around Paris. The Franks were the first tribe among the Germanic conquerors of Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire to convert to Catholic Christianity rather than Arianism (their King Clovis did so in 498); thus France obtained the title “Eldest daughter of the Church” (La fille ainée de l’Église), and the French would adopt this as justification for calling themselves “the Most Christian Kingdom of France”.

Existence as a separate entity began with the Treaty of Verdun (843), with the division of Charlemagne's Carolingian Empire into East Francia, Middle Francia and Western Francia. Western Francia approximated the area occupied by modern France and was the precursor to modern France.
The Carolingian dynasty ruled France until 987, when Hugh Capet, Duke of France and Count of Paris, was crowned King of France. His descendants, the Direct Capetians, the House of Valois and the House of Bourbon, progressively unified the country through a series of wars and dynastic inheritance. The monarchy reached its height during the 17th century and the reign of Louis XIV of France.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normandy was considered to be a Norman Dominion along with England.
 
Last edited:
I would hardly say the americans did most of the fighting in WWI. Not that I dont find that site amusing, but still, I hope no high school kids get their learning done with tht site.
 
Hehe it was only a joke my friend ;). I'm well informed.
But for the World Wars I'm sorry- you lost against Germany and you were freed - you did not win... or am I mistaken?
 
ObjSRgtLw said:
Hehe it was only a joke my friend ;). I'm well informed.
But for the World Wars I'm sorry- you lost against Germany and you were freed - you did not win... or am I mistaken?
Click to expand...

I know, no harm done. ;)

I am not sure how you can claim a loss for France in WWI. I am not belittling the other nations (especially the British), but the French did the Lions share of the fighting in WWI, espicially on the Western Front.

The French fought and won in all the major battles (Marne, Ypres, Aisne, Verdun). The whole reason the Germans signed the Armistice was because they had been repulsed at the second battle of the Marne and were beginning to retreat. With the Arrival of the American Main Body it would have been a rout. WWI, was a war of atrition that was a costly French victory and was the direct result of France loss in 1940. But it was a victory nonetheless. The lesson they learned afterward was that France was not Russia. France couldnt lose 1 Million men and continue to fight.

As for WWII. The French Army never surrendered. The Government did. Frankly the government shouldn't have surrendered. The loss of Paris was inevitable, but most historians have said the French actually had a good chance to regroup and hold the Germans at bay in the South of France. But the spinless government in Paris, unable to cope with the loss of the capital overuled the protests of the Army.

One of De Gaulles greatest moments in 1940 was to encourage the Army to keep fighting, which it did. The French Army after the fall of France split into 3 Parts. The UK (Dunkirk), North Africa (where they either linked up with Montgomery or stayed under Vichy until operation Torch where they rejoined the Allies) and a small group went to the USSR.

Now I will grant you, that the French Army's role in WWII was much less significant than the British or the USSR. I am not attempting to rewrite History, the French Army had a smaller role in 1944. But they still landed at Normandy, Captured Paris, repulsed a major SS counterattack on the Rhine. (Operation Dragoon) and invaded Germany with 10 Divisions (7 Inf + 3 Tank).

By the end of WWII the French Army was the 4th Largest Allied Nation with just over 1.3 Million men.

BritinAfrica

Interesting article but I dont see your point. I grant you that Normandy was a seperate Kingdom but it was still part of France.

Nor wasnt it the only time when France had two kings, it happened again under many subsequent English Kings who used his title as "Duke of Normandy" (Again due to William) to make a claim to the French crown during the 100 years war. So even the English Monachy as early as the 14th century had acknowleged later that Normandy was part of France.

Its no different than the Papcy. Technically its independent from Italian Government but its still part of Italy.
 
mmarsh said:
BritinAfrica

Interesting article but I dont see your point. I grant you that Normandy was a seperate Kingdom but it was still part of France.

Nor wasnt it the only time when France had two kings, it happened again under many subsequent English Kings who used his title as "Duke of Normandy" (Again due to William) to make a claim to the French crown during the 100 years war. So even the English Monachy as early as the 14th century had acknowleged later that Normandy was part of France.

Its no different than the Papcy. Technically its independent from Italian Government but its still part of Italy.
Click to expand...

As usual, history can be extremely complicated. However, 1066 was always refered to as the Norman invasion, not the French.

Since 1929 the Vatican has been an idependent state.

Vatican City en-us-Vatican City.ogg /ˈvætɪkən ˈsɪti/ (help·info), officially the State of the Vatican City (Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano),[7] is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome. At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.

The Vatican City is a city-state that came into existence in 1929 and is thus clearly distinct from the central authority of the Roman Catholic Church, known as the Holy See, which existed long before 1929. Ordinances of Vatican City are published in Italian. Official documents of the Holy See are issued mainly in Latin. The two entities even have distinct passports: the Holy See, not being a country, only issues diplomatic and service passports; the state of Vatican City issues normal passports. In both cases the passports issued are very few.

Regarding the French during WW2.

Casablanca

The Western Task Force landed before daybreak on 8 November 1942, at three points: Safi, Morocco (Operation Blackstone), Fedala, Morocco (Operation Brushwood), and Mehdiya-Port Lyautey, Morocco (Operation Goalpost). Because it was hoped that the French would not resist, there was no preliminary bombardment. This proved to be a costly error as French gunnery and shore installations took their toll on American landing forces.

During the previous night, a coup attempt had been made by French General Bethouard, whose forces surrounded the villa of General Auguste Paul Nogues. However, Nogues managed to telephone nearby French forces which prevented his capture. In addition, the coup attempt alerted Nogues to the likelihood of an impending Allied amphibious invasion, and he immediately bolstered French coastal defenses.

At Safi, Morocco, the landings were mostly successful. The landings were initially conducted without covering fire, hoping that the French might not resist at all. However, once the Allied transports were fired on by French coastal batteries, the Allied ships returned fire. By the time Allied commanding General Harmon arrived, French snipers had pinned the assault troops (most of whom were in combat for the first time) on Safi's beaches. Most of the landings occurred behind schedule; air support from the carriers destroyed a French convoy of trucks intended to reinforce the defenses. Safi surrendered on the afternoon of 8 November. By 10 November, the remaining defenders were pinned down, and the bulk of Harmon's forces raced to join the siege of Casablanca.

Around Port-Lyautey, Morocco, the landing troops were uncertain of their position, and the second wave was delayed. This gave the French defenders time to organize resistance, and the remaining landings were conducted under artillery bombardment. With the assistance of air support from the carriers, the troops pushed ahead, and the objectives were captured.

Around Fedala, Morocco (the largest landing with 19,000 men), weather disrupted the landings. The landing beaches again came under French fire after daybreak. U.S. General Patton landed at 08:00, and the beachheads were secured later in the day. The Americans surrounded the port of Casablanca by 10 November, and the city surrendered an hour before the final assault was due to take place.

A squadron of the French navy at Casablanca, including the unfinished battleship Jean Bart, along with numerous cruisers and destroyers, made a sortie to oppose the landings but was defeated by superior firepower. Two Americans destroyers were damaged.
 
Last edited:
BritinAfrica

As I said Normandy was a second Kingdom within France. France was made up of two kingdoms the Frankish Kingdom and the Norman one. And frankly by 1066 it would have difficult to tell them apart, language, culture, religion all the same. Remember William spoke ancient French -the same language as the Franks. These Kingdoms later fused to what later became known as modern France.

You cannot say it was the Normans not the French, because the Normans ARE French, as are the Franks. Modern France didn't exist at that time.

BritinAfrica

As for the Casablanca invasion, you missed the overall context. The French did not fire on the Allied Fleet as they did fire on the British Fleet. If you remember, the RN had bombarded the French Fleet after the fall of France in Mers-el-Kabir Algeria. That was something the French Navy didn't forget and they were quite pissed off about it. So when a invasion force showed up 2 years later, what do you think would have been their response? The Navy had no love for the Germans the just disliked the British more. Was this abit hotheaded and ill-advised? Yes. And as you pointed out, The French Forces were literally recieving orders from two governments, the Free French under DeGaulle and Vichy under Petain. The Army was definitly pro-Allies, the Navy leaned toward Vichy..and not that much. The person who signed the Armistice was Admiral Darlan whom was assassinated by a local screwball shortly thereafter. I just finished ARMY AT DAWN, about the American North African Campaign. The author states that was a diplomatic mistake on Eisenhower's part, has he should have realized the resentment the French Navy had of the British.

But Losses were light, aside from a few French ships. The aftermath of this minor skirmish was that all French forces sided with the Allies and became US General Harold Anderson XIX Corps, French warships like the Richelieu joined the RN, and participated in the D-Day landings.
 
Last edited:
mmarsh said:
BritinAfrica

As I said Normandy was a second Kingdom within France. France was made up of two kingdoms the Frankish Kingdom and the Norman one. And frankly by 1066 it would have difficult to tell them apart, language, culture, religion all the same. Remember William spoke ancient French -the same language as the Franks. These Kingdoms later fused to what later became known as modern France.

You cannot say it was the Normans not the French, because the Normans ARE French, as are the Franks. Modern France didn't exist at that time.
Click to expand...

Sorry mate I dont agree, as I said it was considered a Norman invasion not French. The Scots speak English (sort of) as do the Welsh, Irish, US, Aussies, Kiwi's and so on, yet none of them are English. Call a Jock English and he'll hit you over the head with his sporron. Canada was a Dominion of Britain, but they werent British. You said yourself they were two seperate kingdoms which were later to become one.


mmarsh said:
BritinAfrica

As for the Casablanca invasion, you missed the overall context. The French did not fire on the Allied Fleet as they did fire on the British Fleet. If you remember, the RN had bombarded the French Fleet after the fall of France in Mers-el-Kabir Algeria. That was something the French Navy didn't forget and they were quite pissed off about it. So when a invasion force showed up 2 years later, what do you think would have been their response? The Navy had no love for the Germans the just disliked the British more. Was this abit hotheaded and ill-advised? Yes. And as you pointed out, The French Forces were literally recieving orders from two governments, the Free French under DeGaulle and Vichy under Petain. The Army was definitly pro-Allies, the Navy leaned toward Vichy..and not that much. The person who signed the Armistice was Admiral Darlan whom was assassinated by a local screwball shortly thereafter. I just finished ARMY AT DAWN, about the American North African Campaign. The author states that was a diplomatic mistake on Eisenhower's part, has he should have realized the resentment the French Navy had of the British.

But Losses were light, aside from a few French ships. The aftermath of this minor skirmish was that all French forces sided with the Allies and became US General Harold Anderson XIX Corps, French warships like the Richelieu joined the RN, and participated in the D-Day landings.
Click to expand...

One of my uncles was in the British 8th Army, he was fired on by the French Foreign Legion.

As for Mers-el-Kabir Algeria, the British quite understandably didnt want the French fleet falling into the hands of the Germans and were given the chance to hand them over but refused. Quite rightly the RN opened fire and sank the majority of the French fleet.

As for losses being light during Operation Torch, again I wouldnt agree, neither would I call it minor

Oran

The Center Task Force was split between three beaches, two west of Oran and one east. Landings at the westernmost beach were delayed because of a French convoy which appeared while the minesweepers were clearing a path. Some delay and confusion, and damage to landing ships, was caused by the unexpected shallowness of water and sandbars; although periscope observations had been carried out, no reconnaissance parties had been landed on the beaches to determine local conditions. This was in contrast to later amphibious assaults, such as Operation Overlord, in which considerable weight was given to pre-invasion reconnaissance.

The U.S. 1st Ranger Battalion landed east of Oran and quickly captured the shore battery at Arzew. An attempt was made to land U.S. infantry at the harbour directly, in order to quickly prevent destruction of the port facilities and scuttling of ships. The operation, code named Operation Reservist, failed as the two destroyers were shattered by crossfire from the French vessels there. The French Navy broke from the harbour and attacked the Allied invasion fleet but were sunk or driven ashore.
 
Last edited:
mmarsh said:
I know, no harm done. ;)

I am not sure how you can claim a loss for France in WWI. I am not belittling the other nations (especially the British), but the French did the Lions share of the fighting in WWI, espicially on the Western Front.

The French fought and won in all the major battles (Marne, Ypres, Aisne, Verdun). The whole reason the Germans signed the Armistice was because they had been repulsed at the second battle of the Marne and were beginning to retreat. With the Arrival of the American Main Body it would have been a rout. WWI, was a war of atrition that was a costly French victory and was the direct result of France loss in 1940. But it was a victory nonetheless. The lesson they learned afterward was that France was not Russia. France couldnt lose 1 Million men and continue to fight.

As for WWII. The French Army never surrendered. The Government did. Frankly the government shouldn't have surrendered. The loss of Paris was inevitable, but most historians have said the French actually had a good chance to regroup and hold the Germans at bay in the South of France. But the spinless government in Paris, unable to cope with the loss of the capital overuled the protests of the Army.

One of De Gaulles greatest moments in 1940 was to encourage the Army to keep fighting, which it did. The French Army after the fall of France split into 3 Parts. The UK (Dunkirk), North Africa (where they either linked up with Montgomery or stayed under Vichy until operation Torch where they rejoined the Allies) and a small group went to the USSR.

Now I will grant you, that the French Army's role in WWII was much less significant than the British or the USSR. I am not attempting to rewrite History, the French Army had a smaller role in 1944. But they still landed at Normandy, Captured Paris, repulsed a major SS counterattack on the Rhine. (Operation Dragoon) and invaded Germany with 10 Divisions (7 Inf + 3 Tank).
By the end of WWII the French Army was the 4th Largest Allied Nation with just over 1.3 Million men.
Click to expand...
I don't say there weren't any victories in the world wars on the french side, but I don't think one can say France 'won' the wars. Without any help from outside a total defeat would have been inevitable. Even the Maginot line was no match for German Forces who only had the mission to hold the line bussy but cracked it anyways without motorized vehicles... Anyways, WW I I agree that it was a very hard battle for both and the victory was not quite as obvious as in WWII. As for the surrender of France, i don't agree with you- it was, to my mind, the best way to retreat to England. in any case after Paris went down there was not much left to fight the Germans... and remember that the south part under Vichy supported the NAzi-Regime openly- there was not much ground left... and the Resistance was usefull, yes - but did not win the war for France...
 
ObjSRgtLw said:
I don't say there weren't any victories in the world wars on the french side, but I don't think one can say France 'won' the wars. Without any help from outside a total defeat would have been inevitable. Even the Maginot line was no match for German Forces who only had the mission to hold the line bussy but cracked it anyways without motorized vehicles... Anyways, WW I I agree that it was a very hard battle for both and the victory was not quite as obvious as in WWII. As for the surrender of France, i don't agree with you- it was, to my mind, the best way to retreat to England. in any case after Paris went down there was not much left to fight the Germans... and remember that the south part under Vichy supported the NAzi-Regime openly- there was not much ground left... and the Resistance was usefull, yes - but did not win the war for France...
Click to expand...

I agree with that assessment.
How many French actually took part in the resistance? Not many, I forget the exact number but somewhere in the region of less then 5% of the total population. However, I have nothing but praise for the members of the resistance.

All too often shot down Allied aircrew or escaping POW's were captured because of the assistance given by a number of French collaborators.

In early 1943, the Vichy authorities established a paramilitary group, the Milice, to combat the resistance alongside the German forces that were stationed in all of France by the end of 1942. The group collaborated closely with the Nazis and was the Vichy equivalent to the Gestapo security forces in Germany.Their actions were often very brutal and included the torture and executions of suspected resistance members. After the liberation of France, many of the estimated 25,000 to 35,000 miliciens were themselves executed for collaboration. Many of those who escaped arrest fled into Germany, where they were incorporated into the Charlemagne Division of the Waffen SS.

I remember a story told by my father in France after D day. He took a Frenchman to task for beating a horse pulling a heavily over loaded cart. The Frenchman told him to mind his business and that "The Germans didnt interfere."
 
Last edited:
ObjSRgtLw+BritinAfrica

But you could say that about any one of the Allied Countries. Not one of them can claim they won WWII by themselves, not even the USSR or the USA. But France fought on the side that did win and although their contribution was smaller than USSR, US, or the UK. I am not saying that France won and the other allied countries didn't win, what I am saying is it was a team effort and France was on the side of the team that won. The fact remains the French Army never surrendered, and never gave up the fight. Even those under Vichy obeyed their orders only reluctantly. Remember the French scuttled their own fleet at Toulon rather than give it to the Germans.

As for the Fall of France in 1940. Paris was Lost, that was inevitable. Vichy was pro-NAZI AFTER France surrendered. But suppose the French Government decided to flee southward instead of surrender. The French had Fresh forces in the South to prevent against a Italian invasion. It was possible that the French could have stableized the front, exactly like they did on the Marne in 1914. Now nobody knows if it would have worked, its very possible the Germans would have won anyway.

The cowards in government were so eager to surrender that they sacked Prime Minister Raynaud because he REFUSED to surrender and replaced him with Petain. The point is the French Army was beaten in 1940, but it was not broken. General Weygrand still had 64 divisions available to make a stand, the French surrendered too early and too quickly.

Were there collaborators? Yes, there were collaborators in all countries including the UK. (Remember Lord Haw-Haw?) There are two types of collaborators, those who did so because they had no choice as they were under duress like (the Occupied Zone, the Vichy Government, etc) and those willingly joined the Nazi cause (The extreme rightwing, french facists, other antisemite or anticommunist groups). The former group was greater than the later. Furthermore there were goon-squads in every occupied country. Even the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto had their Nazi Collaborators. So to level this against France uniquely is unfair. There were those in Poland, latvia and Lithuania who were far more coopertative then the French were. Furthermore the Maquis+FFI killed anyone they suspected as a collaborator, those who were caught in SS or Gastopo service were shot on the spot.

As for the Resistance being small? The French Government to date has recognized 220,000 people as resistance fighters. That's equivilant to 22 US Army Divisions. Thats not tiny.

As for Torch, the total Causilties (KIA, WIA, MIA, POW) were 1469. The US lost more than that in a single hour on D-Day, or the 10,000 they lost a fews months later at Kasserine Pass. More people drowned aboard TITANIC and that was an accident. Its unfortunate it happened, but sometimes s*** happens in War. My Great Uncle Free-French Army unit was supposed to join the British 8th Army (same as your uncle) in North Africa but he never made as his troopship was accidentally sunk and then strafed in the water by RAF Aircraft. Those attacks killed alot of Friendly French troops.

As for your ancedote, thats possible because the Germans didnt venture too deep into the French countryside except in force (as it belong to the Maquis, lone units could be picked off). However he would have gotton a much grimer tale had he been in Paris or Lyon. My Grandmother, Great uncle, and Grandfather could tell you how much the Germans did interfere. the of course their was also Oradour-sur-Glane...

BritinAfrica, your examples of the Aussies, Ireland, Canadians, Scots doesnt really work because they all eventually split off to found their own country. Scotland has been trying to do the same for 400 years. But in Normandy (and other provinces) they didnt split apart they did the opposite: they fused together. As I said in 1066 there was no France.

In Normandy today nobody calls themselves Normans (when referring to nationality), they call themselves French. Just like Prussians and Bohemians dont call themselves those names anymore, they call themselves Germans. And the various German states didnt all come from the same tribe either. Exactly the same thing. Prussia Beat Napoleon at Waterloo, would I say Prussians are not Germans, of course not. The reason we say Prussia and not Germany is because Germany didnt exsist until 50 years later. But its the same people.

Sorry for long post...
 
The French Government to date has recognized 220,000 people as resistance fighters.
Click to expand...
Hmm well i have to smile a little there... That does smell in some way... well OF COURSE France did everything it could to throw the Krauts out of their country... but if those numbers were true... just imagine 220000 attacks (or only 1000) each week against German Forces... Germany would have been defeated in France in some weeks- but they weren't ... why is that? I think some things are regarded differently today... not every country has so much realistic self reflection than Germany today... we actually have too much of it... but still I'm proud of that... in comparison to Russia for example we are way in front with reflecting our past...
Just some thoughts, feel free to correct me.
 
And if it wasn't for the USA, England, Australia, and Canada today the french would be speaking German and all would have been lost.....
 
ObjSRgtLw said:
Hmm well i have to smile a little there... That does smell in some way... well OF COURSE France did everything it could to throw the Krauts out of their country... but if those numbers were true... just imagine 220000 attacks (or only 1000) each week against German Forces... Germany would have been defeated in France in some weeks- but they weren't ... why is that? I think some things are regarded differently today... not every country has so much realistic self reflection than Germany today... we actually have too much of it... but still I'm proud of that... in comparison to Russia for example we are way in front with reflecting our past...
Just some thoughts, feel free to correct me.
Click to expand...

That's because you are only counting those who launched attacks on the Nazis. That was only part of their activity. Not all the Resistance fighters were partisan fighters. Some printed leaflets so that public would know what was really going on. Some Gathered intelligence. Some had hidden radios to transmit and receive information, some ran underground railroads to shuttle downed airmen to Spain. Some specialized in counterfeit nazi documents to allow safe passage.

Eisenhower said after Normandy that the aid of the French Resistence was equiviliant to 15 Divisions as its information and activities saved countless American lives.
 
Well how many Germans were 'not actively' against the Regime? We can't say that today... just saying that one should be very carefull with raising numbers about who was in the resistance and who not- because without a doubt nearly everyone now says he was...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top