*performs poorly in a war*
*but still get what it wants at the end*
>>3256888
*but still remains the laughing stock of the world*
>>3256877
*performs poorly in ONE war after withholding a massive invasion 25 years before*
>>3257532
>after getting blitzkrieged in the previous french-german war
>>3257539
>blitzkrieged
>Franco-Prussia War
>a war that lasted 9 fucking months
>>3257532
Not even true, they lost ONE battle of this war and won all the others.
>american education
*conquers most of Europe 100 years before
>>3257603
wrong, 6 months
>>3257607
Uh what? You have Sedan which unhinges the line, and then you have clear German victories at things like Boulogne, let alone when Fall Rot starts. That's not even getting into more complicated outcomes but usually the Germans succeeding at their goals, like Arras (the 1940 one) or the siege of Lille.
>>3257532
By 1918, France held less than half the western front lmao
>>3257618
*teleports your general to an island*
heh , nothing personal France
>>3257635
I'm talking about the Battle of France in general. After that, if I'm correct, they won all the battles until the end of the war.
>>3257644
Akshually
>>3257678
But counting the "Battle of France" as one battle, and then everything else the Free French did afterwards as separate ones is absurd on its face. Even the German assaults were divided into two separate offensive operations, Fall Gelb and Fall Rot. Would you call Operation Barbarossa and the Rzhev operations really just one battle?
And then there's the scale. Sure, you have tactical successes like Bir Hakim, or the Free French contingent in Dragoon, but those are battles that are on scope in terms of men and equipment committed to individual actions within the "Battle of France" like the aforementioned siege of Lille.
Not to mention that the Free French forces did have failures afterwards. The attempt to seize Dakar springs heavily to mind, and I'm sure that if I trawled through the various slogging attempts in Italy, I could find ones where the Free French forces got their noses badly bloodied, like everyone else did there.
>>3257683
>ww1
>couldn't even beat half the german army
>franco-german war (propagandisticly labelled as "battle of" post war)
>got wrecked
>>3256877
France was kicking ass in WW1 and every war before that (Franco-Prussian war doesn't count). kys kraut
>>3257699
>Not to mention that the Free French forces did have failures afterwards.
That's why I mentioned "if I'm correct". And yes I know that the Battle of France was a bit extended (where the French were successful sometimes, like in the Battle of the Alps), it was just a generalization to point out that people like OP focus only on one battle, forgetting the rest of the war.
>>3256888
>>3257532
>>3257608
>>3257618
>>3257683
>>3257737
46 DAYS
>>3257764
1 DAY
>>3257778
What did he mean by this?
>>3257764
>46 DAYS
Reminder that the CSA outlasted all of Western Europe by 1,193 days resisting the full might of the United States alone with only a fraction of the manpower and resources.
>>3257780
The Battle of Pearl Harbor lasted 1 day before the USA were defeated. At least the Battle of France lasted longer...
>>3257798
That's because southern men aren't like Europeans and don't surrender when they see a spooky gun
>>3257798
That's because they weren't up against tanks, aircraft, and heavy artillery.
>>3257798
Are you seriously trying to equate the warmaking potential of the U.S. in 1861 as opposed to 1941?
That's pretty retarded.
>>3257764
Pretty pathetic indeed
But there's worse:
>In total, Napoleon and the Grande Armée had taken only 19 days from the commencement of the invasion of Prussia until essentially knocking it out of the war with the capture of Berlin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Fourth_Coalition#Prussian_campaign
19 fuckings days....
>>3257816
Bingo
>>3257827
>>3257828
Considering the fact the Union had even larger potential technological advantage (repeating rifles, Gatling guns, telegraph communications, even early poison gas), than the Germans did over the British and French AND had a pool of soldiers nearly twice as large than what the Confederacy had, that's actually quite impressive.
>>3257937
How do I become an honorary southerner
>>3257840
If you think that's bad look at this one
>11 DAYS
>>3257608
its not just americans who think these things
>>3258006
WE GOTTA GO DEEPER
>>3257764
>>3257840
>>3258006
Are you guys even trying?
>>3258208
Less impressive
>>3258208
>it's a "Britain boasts about defeating a nignog city-state" episode
>>3258208
>1 wounded
What was that guy's problem
>>3258303
Bet he tripped and fell on something.
>>3257603
That's not very long.
>>3258260
>>3258231
>It's another "/his/ triggered by Britain" episode
>>3257798
But the Confederacy contained one third of the might of the United States
>>3257840
How many french general managed to capture entire cities and armies with an inferior force?
I remember one case where a french army of X men with no guns captured a german army of 10X men and a lot of guns, because they told him Napoleon is on his way with the rest of the troops and the germsn just surrendered.
>>3257811
A bombing run is not a battle, the USA defeated Japan.
>>3257840
Napoleon was Italian, not French.
>>3256877
They did very well most of the time until 1871. Pretty good run all in all.
>>3259940
He was corsican not italian and the soldiers was and the generals were French
>tfw every attempt at unifying Europe will fail as long as the islanders breathe
>>3258208
>if we get ready to fire on a city state and then declare war just as we fire we might get a world record
>*Steal your territory and get away with it*
HON HON !!!
>>3257798
Shut the fuck faggot. Go back to fucking your negro sister
>>3260744
>Shut the fuck faggot
>>3257798
Woah...so this is...the might...of Southerners.
>>3258467
I've always wondered about this. Is /his/ full of frogs that got booted from /pol/ or something?