France literally lost faster than Poland.
They had the best gear, material help from everyone else, British reinforcements and only one single enemy (Italians not acknowledged for obvious reasons).
And they lost in a month. Like Poland.
Is the French bloodline just weak? Is this the results of monopolization sometime during their long history?
>>79173724
The French were too arrogant und underestimated the invaders
>>79173948
Faster than poland. A country with a pathetic army, no natural borders and flanked on all sides.
>>79174093
these people fought tanks with horsemen. At least they had willpower. I could have lived with Poland as one of the 4 occupying forces better than with France
The French gave up quickly, and looking back it might have been a good choice, considering that it was Poland that ended up losing a fifth of it's population and having it's major cities leveled to the ground.
But you also have to consider this: when the second world war started Poland as a country had only existed for roughly 20 years after being occupied for 123 years, I'd assume that the push to fight till the end was greater, since no one would want to lose their newly gained independance again.
>>79175448
>123 years
nice number. Bet that's easy to learn for Polish history classes
>>79174297
>these people fought tanks with horsemen
Hans, this aint /pol/.
>>79174297
>le poles charged tanks with horses meme
>>79174093
>A country with a pathetic army,
Poland had a 1 million strong army with 900 tanks, 600 planes which statistically put it in the 4th place as the strongest in Europe during that time...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KrWneSgOhc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUk7KPtMR8w
>>79174297
>these people fought tanks with horsemen.
Didn't happen.
>>79176732
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Westerplatte
Meanwhile in france they gave their asses for free
maginot line too small
>>79173724
>France literally lost faster than Poland.
That's wrong tho
France lasted 45 days while Poland lasted 35
Although I agree that lasting slighthly longer than them is shameful
>>79173724
Brw, Germans got conquered by France in 19 days in 1806
So if it was about bloodline, they wouldnt have become so good at war the next century
>>79173724
We had good tanks but we lacked the doctrine that came with it, unlike the Germans (ironically enough, De Gaulle already told everyone about what could be done with tanks, but the rest of the French HQ didnt give a fuck, their minds were still 30 years in the past and they underestimated the enemy).
Germans also attack through the Ardennes forest, while everyone thought it would be impossible, add to this the fact that the government was leftists pacifist who didnt prepare us at all for the war (unlike nazis) and finally the fact that WW1 scared us of war and violence, whereas it just made the germans angrier because they lost.
Thats a handfull of reasons why we did so bad, don't know about Poland though but I'm pretty sure they did pretty well given the circumstances
>>79173724
The French soldiers performed really well, it was a small element of the high command that fuffed it.
>>79173724
all you fuckers should read "Strange Defeat" by Marc Bloch instead of writing dumb shit on a taiwanese carving board imageboard if you actually cared about the topic
Germans teleport behind their backs
Poland also would last much longer if soviets didn't invade, after battle of bzura began germans advance was significantly slowed and we still have reserves on east
>>79173724
Nope we continued the War til the end namely in Syria and Lybia
German lost in 19 days against us btw
>>79173948
We had a shitty higher command
>>79173724
>And they lost in a month. Like Poland.
Threadly reminder Poland was invaded by Russia too.
>>79173724
>France literally lost faster than Poland.
That's wrong, tho
>>79176817
yea, now think about WWI, you cunt
If you have to see what brave frenchmen are able to do, look at WWI, not WWII.
>>79176817
No they didn't
>20 dead
>"Polish Verdun"
Hmmm
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Saumur_(1940)