Why are the French good at protesting but useless at war?

[anonymous-user]

They seem good at protesting but when it comes to the battlefield like their vest their insides turn yellow.

[anonymous-user]

AnotherClarkey said:

Threads like this are an embarrassment for our country.

I agree.

OP in WW1 the French (as a % of population) lost twice as many as the UK and more than Germany itself (as a %). The battle of Verdun is not that well known in the UK but was the French WW1 equivalent of Stalin's WW2 Stalingrad.

I get the humour around the French surrendering lots etc but the facts speak for themselves. In WW1 the French made a much bigger sacrifice than the UK. In WW2 the UK would have fallen quicker than France had it not been for the channel (imho).

We have a UK centric view of these things. As a kid I thought the UK had won the second world war single handed, then I learnt the USA actually played a big part, then later I learnt Russia had an even big hand in the outcome!

[anonymous-user]

steviegunn said:

Watched this video recently, get to the end and see which nation has won the most battles in history - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK5OsDWYJmQ

That was interesting but doesn't tell the full picture. Surely instead of absolute numbers of battles won it should be a % of battles taken part in. If I was a boxer and boasted I had won 50 fights that may sound good. But if I said I had been in 10,000 fights then it is a bit poor. Bad statistics can be used to argue anything at all.

Still a really interesting link thanks.

[anonymous-user]

Derek Smith said:

The Mad Monk said:

For Sale:-

One genuine French army rifle. Only thrown down twice.

That's a bit pathetic.

It was a joke. Please don't go out in public where you might meet people who tell jokes :-)

(I'm only teasing, humour is a personal thing, I worked somewhere years ago where everyone had to stop telling jokes because a woman, in a group of people being told a joke, complained to HR and that was that. )

[anonymous-user]

MikeStroud said:

The battle of Verdun is not that well known in the UK but was the French WW1 equivalent of Stalin's WW2 Stalingrad.

But that wasn't always the case. Despite the negligable involvement of the British (a single field ambulance I believe), the Battle left such an impression, that over 20 years after the event, Battle Babies were still being named. Battle Babies refers to a generation who were named after significant events. Between 1914 and 1919, 1600 British babies were named after battles, 900 of those named after Verdun. Verdun has gone down as the bloodiest batter in WW1 per square yard, mostly hand to hand combat. But no babies named after Gallipoli. Obviously, Verdun had captured the imagination and admiration by the British public, particularly in working class communities, in a way that has been lost by today's generation, extolled by the OP.

[anonymous-user]

MikeStroud said:

It was a joke. Please don't go out in public where you might meet people who tell jokes :-)

(I'm only teasing, humour is a personal thing, I worked somewhere years ago where everyone had to stop telling jokes because a woman, in a group of people being told a joke, complained to HR and that was that. )

Arcadia ?