Thank you so much! I appreciate your input.
Is there too much contempt for the French from A&A players?
-
Not that I agree or disagree, but I’ve been waiting for somebody to answer the topic heading with “I think there is just the right amount of contempt”….
-
Not that I agree or disagree, but I’ve been waiting for somebody to answer the topic heading with “I think there is just the right amount of contempt”….
HEY! I did just that (more or less) in my over long post near the bottem of page 5! Ok, well maybe I didnt say that there was “just the right amount” of contempt, but in terms of A&A1940 the contempt the French are held in made sense or was justified.
-
yeah you’re right but he loves bring up those tricky “facts” that seem to get in the way of a squeaky clean French image……
I don’t care about French image. I’m more worry about your image.
Don’t be. Siding with truth is an image that fits me well enough.
To understand history of a nation (war or politic) you have to be impartial but infortunately you’re not.
This is hilarious! I guess that judgements of the same are impossible, thus it is impossible to get any understanding and possible to make statements like “the NAZI’s should be looked at with impartial view”.
Again this is what 20 old men said at Nuremberg in 1946…
And impartiality is essential to be a good moderator.
You point some good fact but you never admit the others ‘‘tricky’’ facts… shockedNothing tricky about those facts. I never once ignored that collaboration was much greater than resistance in the case of France. Further, just because you love the French in spite of whatever they do they do have a period of being really ‘tricky’ during 1870-45.
So don’t ask an open-ended question and then just blast everyone who answers it in a way that you don’t like,
And the difference obviously, is a response from peeps like you. If you don’t have issue with my points, i have no way to “blast” ( which means go back to the Historical record to draw facts about French actions, which shoots down your weak arguments)
Trick that.
-
That was a good post about G40 and the French, Clyde.
-
That was a good post about G40 and the French, Clyde.
I guess, Im kinda hoping Kurt will swing in here with one of his trade mark over-long posts and bring everyone back to basics(also, Kurts posts are so long that any attempt to sit down and refute them point by point is a herculean task left best to people who have gone completely mad and shouldnt be left to sit at computer desks unless all the edges have been rounded off). That way everyone will just take a minute, take a step back and breath, and then maybe we can get with discussing the level of contempt of A&A players have in the context of A&A1940 and not why certian members of this community have the views that they do.
-
If you want to defeat Kurt Godel, in one of his posts in this thread he says the polish defeated the soviet union SINGLE HANDEDLY, which is simply a farce.
That or change the topic to the American Civil War.
-
For example
American Pilots flying FOR the Polish during the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merian_C._Cooper
For valor he was decorated by Polish commander-in-chief Józef Piłsudski with the highest Polish military decoration, the Virtuti Militari.
WOW! That’s Standing ALONE alright.
-
Quote from: Imperious Leader
Again this is because the population had no reservations against fighting against her occupiers.Right, so because a large part of the population was not fighting means they collaborated. Again with this “us vs. them” nonsense. Either you’re with us or against us, is that it?
NO what is true is the people and soldiers who volunteered to join the Vichy Government as police and government types and acted to aid the Germans to commit atrocities is far greater than the number of French employed as resistance fighters or Free French. Us vs. them means for you counting these people and comparing, which you don’t acknowledge. So now you know.
Quote
How convenient to ignore days before the allies invade or after they invade.Except they didn’t “ignore days” before the Allied invasion. As I’ve already pointed out they constantly fed intelligence to the Allies in Britain and smuggled downed pilots out of the country.
Yea more of this “they” quantitatively few compared to those who fed intelligence to the NAZI’s to aid them in rounding up people for death. Don’t let that get in the way of “they” :mrgreen:
Quote
Compared to the systematic acts of collaboration, these acts pale in comparison.Your point being? Still waiting on those numbers of collaboration by the way.
The point which you will never acknowledge, that for the most part French actions of WW2 are replete with aiding the Germans , not fighting them.
Quote
And how did Yugoslavia use such excuses of physical separation? They didn’t. They fought all the way. Other nations occupied did not just form collaboration government and pretend they are ‘neutral’.Guess you’ve never heard of Quisling. Or the “Independent State of Croatia”. Or Dutch police and civilian authorities collaborating with the Nazis (the Netherlands had one of the highest levels of collaboration with the Nazis during the Holocaust. Guess that means they’re all cowardly, incompetent fighters, hmm?) Or the Denmark “Protectorate Government”.
Because i don’t post about Quisling does not mean i don’t know about him. But i guess making the argumentative fallacy of “hey they did bad, so that means my French are not so bad”.
You’re extremely oversimplifying it. The fact that French historians to this day are extremely divided on Vichy France does not mean that “they” all just sweep it under the carpet. I’m not sure why you still think France is some big monolithic entity with a hive mind where all its inhabitants have the exact same opinions of Vichy.
That is not my position. I am counting acts of defiance vs. collaboration so you have nothing to argue about, knowing that the acts of the latter for whatever reason far outweigh those of the former.
Quote
And again ignoring the fact that Germany was almost completely occupied before they surrendered, unlike France which falls with about 20% of their country is occupied.Well I’m sorry that you feel the French didn’t follow in the footsteps of the Germans and throw young boys and old men after an overwhelming force even when the war was far lost.
Right. With young men and seasoned veterans, they surrendered basically when the Germans reached Sedan. Germany fought on with old men and kids and while like 90% of the nation was occupied. Who lasted longer before surrender? What are you even arguing about?
Quote
Yes some french did decide, while the vast majority went “Vichy”.Still waiting on those numbers–-
Quote
They became policemen who helped Germans find innocent people–-Oh, right! Nevermind, we have the numbers right here. According to you the vast majority of the French population became policemen. Never before have I heard of such an influx of people, millions at that, actively go out and round up people.
Those numbers outweigh the numbers of french peeps blowing up bridges….and making your argument stronger by ignoring my 100,000 quote and inserting “millions” is a masterstroke of hilarity.
Quote
The Free French was not a “government” it was nothing but a loose collection of French soldiers that escaped Dunkirk. The “French Government” was in fact Vichy collaborating with the Germans for 4 years. The Free French was also a number of military units fighting with the allies and totally financed by UK.Really? Just soldiers from Dunkirk? Then pray tell how it managed to grow to 540,000 by 1944, when 139,997 French soldiers were evacuated from France, a great many who eventually was repatriated?
here are some facts to ponder…
“The Free French forces were drawn mostly from the French colonial empire, rather than from metropolitan France”
“Out of about 60,000 troops evacuated from France in July 1940, only about 3,000 chose to continue the struggle, joining de Gaulle’s army in London. By the end of the year, he had 7,000 troops.”
“Until 23 October 1944,the Vichy Regime was acknowledged as the official government of France by the United States and other countries, including Canada…”
“The exact strength of the Vichy French Metropolitan Army was set at 3,768 officers, 15,072 non-commissioned officers, and 75,360 men. All Vichy French forces had to be volunteers. In addition to the army, the size of the Gendarmerie was fixed at 60,000 men plus an anti-aircraft force of 10,000 men”
“The Vichy French colonial forces were reduced in accordance with the Armistice. Still, in the Mediterranean area alone, the Vichy French had nearly 150,000 men in arms. There were approximately 55,000 men in the Protectorate of Morocco, approximately 50,000 men in French Algeria, and almost 40,000 men in the “Army of the Levant” (Arm�e du Levant) in the Mandate of Lebanon and the Mandate of Syria. The colonial forces were allowed some armored vehicles. However, these tended to be “vintage” tanks as old as the World War I-era Renault FT.”
“Besides the concentration camps opened by Vichy, the Germans also opened on French territory some Ilags (Internierungslager) to detain enemy aliens, and in Alsace, which had been annexed by the Reich, they opened the camp of Natzweiler, which is the only concentration camp created by Nazis on French territory (annexed by the Third Reich). Natzweiler included a gas chamber which was used to exterminate at least 86 detainees (mostly Jewish) with the aim obtaining a collection of undamaged skeletons (as this mode of execution did no damage to the skeletons themselves) for the use of Nazi professor August Hirt.”
“Furthermore, Vichy enacted a number of racist laws. In August 1940, laws against antisemitism in the media (the Marchandeau Act) were repealed, while the decree n�1775 September 5, 1943, denaturalized a number of French citizens, in particular Jews from Eastern Europe.Foreigners were rounded-up in “Foreign Workers Groups” (groupements de travailleurs �trangers) and, as the colonial troops, were used by the Germans as manpower .The Statute on Jews excluded them from the civil administration.”
"Vichy also enacted a number of racist laws in its French territories in North Africa (Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia). “The history of the Holocaust in France’s three North African colonies (Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia) is intrinsically tied to France’s fate during this period.”
-
I think this is a high sign of a comming apocalypse in that both Gargantua and IL are on the same page in all this. Here are two twin antagonists in the A&A.org forums (whom I had just started to assume picked opposing sides in every argument based simply on being contradictory to whomever posted first) standing side by side, working together to make the same point, and if that dosnt scare you or give you serious reason to think that your entire universe is just the musing of an autistic child looking through snow globe, cancel your appointments because it appears you have died
-
I think this is a high sign of a comming apocalypse in that both Gargantua and IL are on the same page in all this. Here are two twin antagonists in the A&A.org forums (whom I had just started to assume picked opposing sides in every argument based simply on being contradictory to whomever posted first) standing side by side, working together to make the same point, and if that dosnt scare you or give you serious reason to think that your entire universe is just the musing of an autistic child looking through snow globe, cancel your appointments because it appears you have died
In the words of Admiral Ackbar, “IT’S A TRAP!!!”
-
I think this is a high sign of a comming apocalypse in that both Gargantua and IL are on the same page in all this. Here are two twin antagonists in the A&A.org forums (whom I had just started to assume picked opposing sides in every argument based simply on being contradictory to whomever posted first) standing side by side, working together to make the same point, and if that dosnt scare you or give you serious reason to think that your entire universe is just the musing of an autistic child looking through snow globe, cancel your appointments because it appears you have died
LOL!
-
Not that I agree or disagree, but I’ve been waiting for somebody to answer the topic heading with “I think there is just the right amount of contempt”….
Would have made a great poll choice wouldn’t it?
-
“I think there is just the right amount of contempt”….
On Page 2,
“Re: Is there too much contempt for the French from A&A players?”
No, there isn’t nearly enough.And on Page 5
So the contempt people have for the french, especially at AA.org is earned. Bottom Line.
:)
-
Maybe it is time in the thread to take the heat off of France…and start picking on the other military that receives abundant scorn for its WWII performance: Italy!
Sorry, Italy, chalk it up as collateral damage. Now where did I put the popcorn salt? :|
-
I think this is a high sign of a comming apocalypse in that both Gargantua and IL are on the same page in all this. Here are two twin antagonists in the A&A.org forums (whom I had just started to assume picked opposing sides in every argument based simply on being contradictory to whomever posted first) standing side by side, working together to make the same point, and if that dosnt scare you or give you serious reason to think that your entire universe is just the musing of an autistic child looking through snow globe, cancel your appointments because it appears you have died
By “apocalypse”, i assume obviously that this means:
Demonstrating by obvious facts and proving them as opposed to defending the French no matter what, making arguments that don’t in any way support a view that the French were the bravest people always fighting to the bitter end against evil and never supporting it, or by saying what the Free French and Resistance did as a means of white washing their OTHER actions of collaboration, or just a general " id rather go down defending what they did with flimsy arguments which are not concurrent with reality.
That must mean “apocalypse”. To me the word “Francophile” fits better.
-
Yea Italy is in a worse position than France, except they didn’t really help round up people and ship them to Germany.
In terms of military her record is probably worse, but better in terms of going along with the German racial policies.
But they did claim they were not ready for war till 1943, but for once honored her agreements with her ally ( unlike in the Great War).
When fighting under German control, they did perform better so perhaps they do have a better record in the war.
Italy surrendered with 1/2 of her country was occupied, which is alot more than France.
-
@Imperious:
By “apocalypse”, i assume obviously that this means:
Demonstrating by obvious facts and proving them as opposed to defending the French no matter what, making arguments that don’t in any way support a view that the French were the bravest people always fighting to the bitter end against evil and never supporting it, or by saying what the Free French and Resistance did as a means of white washing their OTHER actions of collaboration, or just a general " id rather go down defending what they did with flimsy arguments which are not concurrent with reality.
That must mean “apocalypse”. To me the word “Francophile” fits better.
That was not a position I took. Not once did I say that that French “fought to the bitter end”, nor did I deny that collaboration existed in France in shameful levels. All I had ever argued was against lumping all or “most” of the French during WWII and holding them accountable for the acts of the so-called “legitimate” Vichy regime, and the notion that the Resistance and Free French were somehow minor sideshows that only did negligible actions. Especially after Vichy was occupied and the Occupation became progressively more harsh, it’s safe to say that the amount of collaboration dwindled. That’s not to say that lets the collaborators off the hook, nor does it excuse the fact that it happened. There were even instances where the Vichy Milice exceeded the Germans’ expectations.
But still, to say the French as a whole collaborated with the Germans is just as fallacious to say the French as a whole fought to the bitter end, because simplifying what a people as a whole did during the most destructive war of all time in a country divided in more ways than one is going to end up looking silly.
-
That was not a position I took.
That was not a response to you…
Not once did I say that that French “fought to the bitter end”, nor did I deny that collaboration existed in France in shameful levels. All I had ever argued was against lumping all or “most” of the French during WWII and holding them accountable for the acts of the so-called “legitimate” Vichy regime, and the notion that the Resistance and Free French were somehow minor sideshows that only did negligible actions. Especially after Vichy was occupied and the Occupation became progressively more harsh, it’s safe to say that the amount of collaboration dwindled. That’s not to say that lets the collaborators off the hook, nor does it excuse the fact that it happened. There were even instances where the Vichy Milice exceeded the Germans’ expectations.
Well that could suffice as an admission of the facts. For the most part collaboration of the French with the Germans existed and to a lesser extent did outright acts of defiance.
But still, to say the French as a whole collaborated with the Germans is just as fallacious to say the French as a whole fought to the bitter end, because simplifying what a people as a whole did during the most destructive war of all time in a country divided in more ways than one is going to end up looking silly.
By the “french” we mean total people who volunteered and acted in concert with the Germans, as opposed to those who acted alone against Germany in France. The argument that somehow you can separate the leadership from the 100,000 volunteers who took police jobs and helped Germany round up people or the 1/2 million who fought under Vichy is last seen at Nuremberg 46, when the German leadership too tried this " i was only following orders" mantra. The fact is many French helped the Germans and a greater number of them than say those resistance fighters.
-
@Red:
Maybe it is time in the thread to take the heat off of France…and start picking on the other military that receives abundant scorn for its WWII performance: Italy!
Sorry, Italy, chalk it up as collateral damage. Now where did I put the popcorn salt? :|
Oh dont waste your time, at this point trying to change the topic into anything other then BOO FRENCH! is largely going to be ignored, or attacked as subversively pro-french for not fostering a stronger way in which to say BOO FRENCH! Atleast you and Gar appericated the humor in my attempt at making light of the increasingly obtuse positions being taken but oh well :|
To (yet again) answer the question at hand, No I dont think France is held in too much contempt by the A&A community in terms of the Global 1940. France is rendered nigh useless (unless you routinely scarfice chickens to the dice gods) by the first turn. This is a game mechanic which simplifys what was a very complex situation in France but is one that is absolutely necesarry for the game to progress. It is an example of a game mechanic coloring the opinions of people who arent well informed on the complexities of WW2 (of which there is a boat load of).
In my opinion the Soviet Union is the country which is held in the higest contempt by the A&A.org community.
-
This is hilarious! I guess that judgements of the same are impossible, thus it is impossible to get any understanding and possible to make statements like “the NAZI’s should be looked at with impartial view”.
- What a stupid example! but hey… I’ve you make laugh…sorry but you’re pathetic…
Again this is what 20 old men said at Nuremberg in 1946…
Hum…I think they were 22.Nothing tricky about those facts. I never once ignored that collaboration was much greater than resistance in the case of France. Further, just because you love the French in spite of whatever they do they do have a period of being really ‘tricky’ during 1870-45.
I read a lot of book in french and in english about WWII and never read that French people think they are the braviest between 1870-1945.
In fact, most of French are not proud of what happens between 1939 and 1943.
But you probably red it in anti-francophile book…Oh…or in Wikipedia somwhere. I know you love it :roll:
Suggested Topics
