You’re welcome.
Battle of the North Atlantic
-
you have not brought up any ‘proof’ to the contrary. A map of the world in 1942 or any reference by the world at large always has Vichy France. If a few frenchies ever called themselves the “french state” i suspect they drank too much wine or figured that france was forever a vassal of German occupation. Vichy france is what it was called because it was exactly not to be confused with the french republic.
So please show us a line where the any author, historian, historical map EVER once referred to Vichy France as “the french state” So far you have done nothing.
a) it covers the same area as the real VF, i.e. it has no Atlantic coastline, and
b) the map is set at the time VF existed, i.e. Summer 1940-November 1942nothing has ever been done by me that would not reflect that. The territories labeled free french indicate where they automatically.
but that’s like calling Eastern USA “Washington America”.
Your not making any credible analogy. America was not conquered and forced to make a substitute capital in say Chicago forced under the treaty they made with Germany. Vichy France was the name of the reformed government under Petain centered in Vichy rather than Paris. It reflects a conquered status of what was self imposed and offered by Germany. Its the official name they declared themselves as diplomatic relations with other neutrals at large including the USA. A better analogy may have been Manchukuo/ Manchuria which in the former case was an attempt by Japan to establish an independent detached nation from Japan for the purpose of maintaining legitimacy on the public stage, even though it was totally tied to japan as a exploitable conquest. The conquerers in this case have absolutely the right to impose new titles on conquests as long they are neutral to other nations not in the conflict.
Vichy is what the french decided however to call themselves, In Manchuria’s case it was probably acceptable to say Manchukuo because only China still used Manchuria… and they don’t count because they don’t control it. You see how that works?
-
But the French didn’t call themselves that, which is the whole point.
If the rest of the world decides to call the UK “England” it doesn’t make it correct to label it so.
-
But the French didn’t call themselves that, which is the whole point.
If the rest of the world decides to call the UK “England” it doesn’t make it correct to label it so.
Lables are agreed upon things like definiations. When I point to an object and say it is black. We have placed the label black on it.
Lables are usally what is agreed upon by society. If the majority of people start calling the UK England then it becomes to be known as England.
Sure this may not be ethical or right. But you brought up the idea of labels. Anyone could label something something and as long as most people agree with it, the label works.
-
But the French didn’t call themselves that, which is the whole point.
If the rest of the world decides to call the UK “England” it doesn’t make it correct to label it so.
You still never offered anything to prove that. and secondly, if you ever had any proof the relative truth of that statement would render valueless because they were conquered peoples and have no say in what they were called and officially they were Vichy france anyway and thats the title they used to establish diplomatic relations with other neutrals with.
anything else is as usual only in your mind and no other. Your like the only guy in History who ever made such a statement about Vichy france. While i have nearly a thousand books that say one thing…some dude named flashman who posts at AA.org says another thing… I think ill stick with the primary sources rather than you.
-
Updated the map.
-
Hello,
I’ve been browsing the forums and found this discussion about Vichy France rather interesting so I decided to make a few research on my own. The easiest way to settle this is to look at the Constitution of the Vichy regime (the legal document that defines and codes the state) and see the name that they called itself.
Here’s the link I used: http://mjp.univ-perp.fr/france/france.htm
It’s a database from a french university and contains all french constitutions (in french, of course). According to it,
the regime established after the 1940 defeat didn’t call itself ‘Vichy France’, it was called ‘L’Etat Français’ (The French State) in the ‘Loi constitutionnelle du 10 juillet 1940’ (constitutional law of July 10th, 1940), in substitution of the previous ‘3e République’ (‘3rd Republic’ - which was the one crushed by Germany).
It would make no sense (on a political or constitutional level) for the ‘French State’ to call itself Vichy France because that would simply remind the french citizens under its control that its actual power only represented the portion of France not occupied by Germany. In the constitution there’s no reference to its power being limited to that area, it presents itself as a continuation of the 3rd Republic, since nearly all new political regimes present themselves as continuations of the previous ones, in order to claim legitimacy.
Thus, Vichy France is merely a label applied to it because the seat of the government was on Vichy France and the name stuck because that’s how Germans called it (Ribbentrop calls it ‘l’État français à Vichy’ on a letter to Pétain, the president of the French State, available on that site) and the Allies as well.And the name stuck so well, in fact, that in 2003 a law proposal was presented at the French Assemblée Nationalle (National Parliament): http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/12/propositions/pion0729.asp
It’s propose is: “visant à substituer, dans les communications publiques invoquant la période de l’État français, aux références à la ville de Vichy, l’appellation « dictature de Pétain »”. Or, to replace in all public communications that refer to the period of the french State any reference to the village of Vichy by the designation ‘Pétain’s dictatorship’.
According to the text of the proposal the honor and reputation of the citizens of Vichy is tainted by the association of their village with ‘treason, capitulation or outrage at the republican regime’. -
Interesting finds. But it is from a French Government Website. I never trust the government, yet alone some foreign one.
Some Germans also claim that the Holocaust never happened. Now if the German government were to release such a statement would anyone believe it? Of course not.
In every history book I have, the unoccupied part is called Vichy France.
Just because the French government wants to change history does not mean that the past suddenly changes.
-
Thats good research, but the victors and the world really make this determination in the final analysis. That is purely semantics because the real article finds then as Vichy France by what the world at that time used as its reference to France. Perhaps only a few used “the french state” but again i appeal to the history of these times and 99.9999999% of them were using Vichy France. I don’t plan on rewriting History to suit some document that shows one article when a billions others say “Vichy” i say “Vichy” as well.
And perhaps the french should not have signed an armistice in that train because it didn’t reference them as “the french state” I think thats the french way of saving face for a total humiliation and hopelessness of their situation. If i ever even thought of another term to use for them it would be " unoccupied france"
-
Winners write History :)
I only researched this because I’ve done some postgraduate studies on political science and the matter discussed brought my curiosity. According to the university site mentioned above the armstice was legally signed by the 3rd Republic, as Pétain had been legally empossed as the Prime Minister on the 16th of June. He then used his powers to form the French State.
And, like the law proposal mentions, even in France they prefer to refer to the French State as Vichy (it does not mention that the proposal was approved, so most likely it was rejected).
-
If you use “Vichy France” then you must also use “Nazi Germany” on the same principle, as that’s what 99% of histories refer to that state as.
Also, if the rest of the world calls America “Yankee land” does that become it’s official name regardless of the southern states objections?
Winners write history sure enough, but in 1940-42 Vichy France was on the winning side and Free France was a few diehard exiles. I use the term Vichy France quite freely to determine the state I’m talking about, but it doesn’t make it correct to label a map with it, certainly not for 1939. We all use the term “America” but I’ve yet to see the USA so labeled on a map.
-
If you use “Vichy France” then you must also use “Nazi Germany” on the same principle, as that’s what 99% of histories refer to that state as.
That is not a relevant analogy. During the war and in published books and documents they never related to “nazi germany” while they did relate to Vichy france and not this stupid “the french state”
please look at a map of the period and come back.
but in 1940-42 Vichy France was on the winning side and Free France was a few diehard exiles. I use the term Vichy France quite freely to determine the state I’m talking about, but it doesn’t make it correct to label a map with it, certainly not for 1939. We all use the term “America” but I’ve yet to see the USA so labeled on a map.
Clearly more drivel… USA had never surrendered and reestablished her capital in Vichy.
If you look at Yugoslavia after 1941 it ceased to exist. It was turned into Serbia, Croatia, and Montenegro with the balance of territory given to Axis minor allies and Italy as concessions. And NOW look at it. Do you still call it Yugoslavia??? NO YOU DONT!! and the reason is because it was divided by the victors and they write History. Losers never write history…
The frogs have no say in what they are called… they were conquered peoples. Because the “free- french” which represented another party not related to Vichy france was on the American side it has no bearing on this. They rejected Vichy as defeatist, while Vichy was content to help the Germans any way they could.
Your mixing apples and oranges.
-
Other than the Vichy France thing, is there anything else really that important. I think I am at the point were I am done with the map.
-
can you repost latest file?? and email me original? Id like to print it out and play.
also where are the rules?
-
@Imperious:
can you repost latest file?? and email me original? Id like to print it out and play.
also where are the rules?
That should not be a problem to repost the latest file. When I get some free time I will upload it.
As for the rules, I am still typing them up. Should have a good handle on those soon. Very similar to traditional Axis and Allies rules. So should be easy to understand.
As for set up charts. I still have to find myself some free time to print the map out and figure out what the starting units should be to make the game balanced.
-
If you make a copy of the map available i can provide some input on this.
-
As for the rules, I am still typing them up. Should have a good handle on those soon. Very similar to traditional Axis and Allies rules. So should be easy to understand.
So its going to be a standalone document?
If there aren’t many changes you can just reference LHTR. Saves you lots of time.
-
As for the rules, I am still typing them up. Should have a good handle on those soon. Very similar to traditional Axis and Allies rules. So should be easy to understand.
So its going to be a standalone document?
If there aren’t many changes you can just reference LHTR. Saves you lots of time.
I never use LHTR Rules. I am not a fan of those and perfer not to use them.
Ever since I got a new computer, a lot of my files have been scattered when I transfered them over. The map file is 100% intact, the other things like rules and what not are in pieces all over the place.
There are cards, different values for units. For example, tanks take 2 hits to destroy. Elite Units with the use of black chip to indicate as such. Italy is in the game, the convoy routes. America’s Job to finance the war. New use for AA Gun. Nolonger AA Gun, but AA Unit. Different order of conducting a turn. Infantry can be built anywhere rule unless it is occupied area not of your color.
There are enough differences to warrant a complete new rule set. Not to mention the addition of weather.
-
These were some of the card ideas. Ideally each player would draw one per turn.
Cards (Still to do)
Germans
1. Hitler
2. V2 Rocket
3. Bismark (Effect: In one battle a battleship takes 3 hits to destory)
4. Atlantic Wall
5. Atomic Bomb
6. Spain (Effect: Spain can join in on the war)
7. Sweden (Effect: Swedem cam join in on the war)
8. Paratroopers
9. XXI Uboats (Effect: Increased Movement, immune to aircraft fire)
10. Operation Sea-LionItaly
1. Jet Aircraft
2. Air Supplies (Effect: Bombers may transport up to 1 infantry)
3. Industry Improvement (Effect: All units cost 1 IPC less)
4. Mussolini (Effect: Still to be determined)
5. Frogmen (Effect: One allied ship within the Medittearean Sea takes a hit.)
6. Explosive Motor Boats (Effect: Auto 1 hit on any one ship. Card is one time use)USSR
1. Russian Winter
2. Mobile Industrial Complex
3. Massive Draft (Effects: All infantry only cost 2 IPCs)
4. Trans-Siberian Railroad
5. Lend Lease
6. Stalin
7. Battle of StalingradUK/France
1. Winston Churchill
2. Montgomery
3. Paratroopers
4. Operation Market Garden
5. Operation Overload
6. Battle of Britain
7. French Resistance
8. Colonial Forces
9. Charles de Gaulle
10. SonarUSA
1. Atomic Bomb
2. Superfortress
3. Marines
4. Patton
5. Turkey (Effect: Can join in on the war)
6. Paratroopers
7. Long Range Aircraft
8. Sonar
9. Mass Production (Effect: All Tanks and Artillery cost 1 IPC less)
10. Operation Overload -
Id say 3 more for Soviets and 4 more for Italy. get ideas from AARHE if you have too. Then they all have 10 choices.
-
@Imperious:
Id say 3 more for Soviets and 4 more for Italy. get ideas from AARHE if you have too. Then they all have 10 choices.
Yes I could make them all have ten. But I perfer to balance out the total cards for the Axis and the Allies to be even. The cards are just meant to add a sense of randomness to the game, hence making it more dynamic. Some sides will just run out of cards before other players do. This in a sense adds strategy, as one may not want to play the cards right away since they do not know what the enemy has, and the fact that the person may still have more to draw.
Suggested Topics
