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 mongrelization sometime during their long history?
France invented the burger.
No, Germany invented the Burger.
Poland lost in 3 weeks I think. The rest was just some guerilla-like warfare, meaningless. France lasted for longer
1. Actually no.
2. If you discard Italians, you must discard the BEF as well for obvious reasons ("My men are tired")
3. Yes
4. Wtf are you even talking about?
>italians not acknowledged for obvious reasons
is this burger education or what?
I hope you don't consider yourself part of the master race, becaus emaking such threads only exposes your low intellect. Anybody with a brain and historical can can understand why the the battle of France was short.
>Is the French bloodline just weak?
Both the French and the British expected a war like the first world war. Nobody expected a war like the Germans brought, and not to mention that France's government was already in disarray prior to their declaration of war on Germany. Sage.
Poland never surrendered
the Italian people at least tried your people didn't
>1 MORE WEEK GUIZE
wew
>poland was sneak attacked
>france had eight months to get ready
>2. If you discard Italians, you must discard the BEF as well for obvious reasons ("My men are tired")
>Comparing Italians going over mountains to British troops performing better than French troops.
Nope. But nice try. You almost had an argument
>4. Wtf are you even talking about?
French are the where the weak cuck genes of the white race all washed up.
When the French General lesuchandsuch (can't remember his name) was asked what went wrong for his country to suffer such a crushing defeat he replied simply with:
>"socialism"
You see France was scarcely better than Wiemar Republic in those days.
who the fuck cares, people throwing rocks at tanks don't matter
We did not try to hold you back my friend. We did.
America invented the burger
They didnt want to fight Germany again, because they had lost over half of their Young men in WW1 and didnt want that bloodmill to start all over again. They did the smart Thing, in the end the new Armageddon was in the Eastern Front and France didnt have to fight another massacre
of course. it was because you are cowards
French have always been cucks
He's implying that Italians aren't mentioned because they are insignificant as a fighting force when it comes to war.
Italy is fucking terrible at war
It does.
>Norway talking shit about WW2
France lost so many during ww1, and didn't have enough troops. That's why they focused on fortification constructions.... In wrong place
no england invented the burger
at least we tried resisting. Norway never had much of an army, so you'd expect more resistance from a """super power""" who's got 10 times the population of Norway :^)
He was lying through his teeth desu.
The problem of France was rooted in their military budgets - they were constantly shifting priorities. 1920's they wanted new small arms but finished only with machineguns because they've had to finish their superheavy tank and make the D-series of tanks. They've also developed 25mm anti-tank gun and I think that's it for 20's. Oh they've also started project that would lead to Char B1 and B2 but it was finished in the late 30's anyway. Not to mention Maginot line(this actually worked as intended it's just that people assume French expected that Germans would attack it, which isn't true).
To describe 1930's I'll use one example.
They wanted new cavalry/infantry support tank. A light, two-man vehicle. We're talking ~1932. Renault and Hotchkiss made something(Hotchkiss actually lobbied for the requirement to be made because they've had design at hand). HOWEVER, while Hotchkiss, having ready design should've been adopted the requirement was changed. And then again. Both proposals were redesigned and the trials were finished in 1935. Which one of them won? Renault but both were adopted because lobbyists. I'm not even yapping at the vehicle being un-fit for modern warfare - this could've happen to everybody. The problem is that they've started a trial for a vehicle they didn't want because one company developed it on their own, and then told both companies taking part in it to redesign their tanks to meet different requirement TWICE and then didn't even adopt the winner along the line but decided to build both of them. And that's not even all of it. In paralel to mentioned R35 and H35 they've developed FCM, which was the same shit(it had cheaper, welded hull instead of cast one though and was little bit more roomy) and produced all 3. 3 almost identical tanks(generally speaking FCM>R35>H35) that fulfilled the same fucking role.
This happened on every fucking level. That's how they lost
>build massive fortifications on the border with Germany
>beady nazis drive through Belgium and straight past them
>this was apparently overlooked in the design phase
what were you expecting?
But why did all that happen?
Socialism maybe, I dunno.
Certainly they had been going through a great deal of political turmoil, within their own country, in the lead up to WW2.
It's named after Hamburg after all. It was the last thing German emigrants ate before leaving their homeland, that's why they recreated it in America.
no, german blood is simply superior
the maginot line went across the belgian border
never again with italy
...
>collaborated with Nazi Germany the entire war
>w-we were totally victims
It worked as intended.
French figured out that there won't be a repeat of Franco-Prussian war if they'll fortify the area where it happened hard. Instead there would be repeat of WW1, with Germans marching through Belgium.
One of the few armament programs aside from Maginot line, LMG and battleship development on which everybody agreed of was army motorization - and French Army had more trucks than Wermacht in 1940 despite being smaller in size. It served a purpose.
If WW1 was to repeat, NOT getting bogged down in Flanders again was the key point of it - Flanders is easy to defend, hard to attack in(or so they thought after WW1). As such, they needed to reach good positions in the low countries(there was 3-variant plan, depending on which nations, aside from Belgium, were invaded), before the Germans could do it. Simple and "nice" isn't it? And that's what they did. However, Germans were still faster, but the battle raged on, and then, completely ignored event unfolded. Germans crossed Ardennes in mass numbers! Retreat was needed or everything would collapse.
Maginot line, however did what it was supposed to. Germans didn't perform northern and southern thrust to try to encircle French in Alsace-Lorraine, they've had to get around it. It's just that Germans did something even they didn't expect to work.
Military-Industrial complex mixed with fragmented political scene. Had there been pacifists who could hold stable government for one term and they'd have better-managed armament budget than the weak and unstable coalitions that ruled France(remember that they've had parliamentary system). You can blame literally everybody for it. I think it was actually used by Nazis to show why are democracies inferior.
Top kek. I laughed for about an hour when I saw that pic of Hitler and BFF's... France is gay as fuck
haha are you referring to Vidkun Quisling? idiot. Norway was neutral until Germany invaded it because "we needed to be protected from the British" (he wasn't entirely wrong). after which, we were quickly subdued and the Germans appointed nasjonal samling as government
interesting point
i thought you stopped trading with germany and british and whenleft alone would have started supporting the allies?
...
and when left alone would have started supporting the british and the allies*
spaghetti faggots at it again
Musste doch gesagt werden
>remember when grampa jamal be like waaaaah where da french wemyn at and then europe be nigga like us
Stfu, you filthy nigger.
They're just fucking retards.
Brazil invented the burger
A Hamburger from Hamburg, Germany in the USA invented the Hamburger. Basically a fuckin' "Frikadelle im Brötchen". Very German.
We have Wiener, Hamburger, Frankfurter, Berliner - and so on ... Ancient Streetfood.
The French Soldiers were no bad soldiers - they just had the wrong strategy. They pushed everything in the "Marginot Line" and a lot of defense. They couldn't expect our fast battletanks. The tanks rolled through the deep woods like on roads - with full speed. We took the marginot line from behind and went to Paris ... nobody should blame this soldiers 75 years later. On both sides.
No dude, you won the strategic game of taking bridges and having communications made with something else than flags. But you whole talking shit about French tanks (or army in general) is really sickening when 140% of you don't even know what the battle of Hannut is. Our tanks were good. Our planes (at least the D520 for fighters) were top fucking notch (2.5 k/d ratio for D520 squadrons -same as spitfire- but for a third of the build time of the Spit).
Our politicians and strategists though, were trash. Pétain wanted to surrender so he could be a dictator of his own, this traitor.
But stop blaming on us, I mean, who even cares?
ps: it also pains me when people say the Brits fought better in France than the French, because clearly that's not true. The Brits on land have historically been failures. And I don't mean for 1 world war. I mean for a fucking millenium. In WW2 especially, they fled their positions in the defense perimeter at Dunkirk, leaving the French to keep their arses safe. And then they talked shit (once on the other side of the channel). Truly beyond words.
Poland would hold even longer but they got attacked by 2 superpowers from 2 sides.
Also look at some casualties and battles in battle of Poland, they are mostly quite interesting.
And well, frogs had one of biggest army in the world back then and they were only attacked from west.
No, from the south too.
And the number of men mean jack shit when you mobilize 1/8 of the men in the country. What matters is equipment. Like the one you built from the Nazis during the entirety of the war.
You want to know the truth ? We wanted Germany to win. Most french realized that it was for the best.