>Another mass media product about WW1 overrating Brits at the expense of the much more relevant French
>Another mass media product about WW1 depicting Germans as the bad guys
Right after the cancerous BF1, this shit will finish off the perception of France and Germany in WW1.
Deal with it guys, the Eternal Anglo has won.
Not by himself, but thank to his son America.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
telegraph.co.uk
twitter.com
Ok
>jews altering history again
Wow breaking news lads.
>>Another mass media product about WW1 overrating Brits at the expense of the much more relevant French
Even Ernst Jünger said that the Brits fought like men while the French were pussies in WW1
Hmm no, he didnt
He merely said that the places he was deployed to were the British font, so he didnt face the French
Btw, if you look at actual stats, the French inflicted twice as many casualties to the Germans than the British did
I read it years ago but I distinctly recall him praising the Brits' fighting prowess in Storm of Steel
Not WW1 related but I also recall Nietzsche describing the British race as ruthless and warlike
>describing the British race as ruthless and warlike
He should have saw the Russians and Canadians in WW2.
>English movie depicts English as heroes
Shocker
>I read it years ago but I distinctly recall him praising the Brits' fighting prowess in Storm of Steel
He talked about the British and didnt mention the French, only because he only ever fought on British sectors
Using that to make a comparison is dumb
>Germans as the bad guys
But they were.
Pretty sure it's an American movie
English history has become incredibly overrated since America became the cultural superpower after WW2
>watching capeshit
>taking capeshit seriously
Is everyone on Sup Forums underage or some manchild virgin
Maybe the French shouldn't have fucked their colonies up so badly and then they'd have a worthy successor empire glorifying their history too
Bizarre statement. The norm in Hollywood is to depict British soldiers as either inept, plucky weaklings, or evil imperialists. Our military history is almost always downplayed, to the point that the Americans even made a movie about how they cracked the enigma code.
More like the French shouldnt have defeated Britain in a war in 1783
It all steams from there
Most British colonies are utter cancer, but this one former colony make it up for all others
>Most British colonies are utter cancer, but this one former colony make it up for all others
Britain improved every land it stepped foot upon
I just want to watch this movie to see a jewish skeleton BTFO the nazis
Absolutly false
American media depict Britain as much more important than it really was historically
Every Middle Age stuff is about England, when Germany (HRE) and France were much more relevant in that era
Every Crusader is English when most of them were French and German
Every Age of Sail movie is about Britain, when Spain was THE country of the era
Every WW1 movie is about Britain, when France and Russia were more important on the Entente side
And don't get me started about the redcoats
While they were really the shittiest european infantry of the era, Americans always depict them as elite warriors in order to make their victory in the Revolutionary War seem more epic
>when Germany (HRE)
You mean the Habsburgs in other words Austria?
You do know this was a WORLD WAR, right?
Britain had to fight on the Western Front, in the Balkans, Turkey, Middle East, North Africa and in Africa proper. French soldiers fought in France. Wow!
Oh, look at that, Britain had more troops fighting in First World War than France. Funny that!
Oh, what's that? Britain fought the naval part of the war nearly single handedly? What? Britain was actually the cause of the war ending because Germany was blockaded and starved to death?
en.wikipedia.org
Britain not only fought on more fronts than France, but provided more troops to do so. It blockaded Germany, Austria-Hungary and Ottoman Empire and caused mass starvation and resulted in German forces being without food.
Without that and the resulting riots and calls for peace, it is likely the war would have gone on even further and resulted in more deaths.
I know you're shitposting, but you're telling me Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Malaysia, Brunei, India (5th richest country in the world), Malta, Cyprus, Barbados, United States of America and so on are 'cancer'?
I advise you to go to /britpol/ or to start a thread on Sup Forums about this, it'll get you more responses.
>Britain had to fight on the Western Front, in the Balkans, Turkey, Middle East, North Africa and in Africa proper. French soldiers fought in France.
Factually wrong
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
You already lost all credibility, but I'll still go on
>Oh, look at that, Britain had more troops fighting in First World War than France. Funny that!
Yeah, and most of them werent British (pic realted)
Btw, the Allied Supreme Leader (the one to which Germany surrendred) was still French
>Oh, what's that? Britain fought the naval part of the war nearly single handedly?
The naval part consisted in one battle
>Britain not only fought on more fronts than France, but provided more troops to do so
Already proven wrong
But I'll use this to add that France basically fought alone in the Western Front (most important theater) until late 1916 (Somme), because of how ridiculously small the BEF was in the first two years of war
For exemple at the First Marne (most decisive battle on the Western Front), there were 1.4 millions Germans, 1 million French and....40,000 Britons....
>While they were really the shittiest european infantry of the era, Americans always depict them as elite warriors in order to make their victory in the Revolutionary War seem more epic
They do the complete opposite you fucking mongoloid.
why have white people colonized everyone and everything?
This dumb frog really thinks he would have withstood the German Spring Offensive without the British.
Hell without the British the French navy would have been blown into 50000 pieces and the German fleet would rape all shipment coming into France
Nah, in the middle age, the HRE was mostly Germany
>This dumb frog really thinks he would have withstood the German Spring Offensive without the British
Wut?
No one said that
One can aknowledge the fact that France was more relevant than Britain in WW1, while also aknowledging that France couldnt have won alone
Germany was by far the most powerful country of the era (and I don't say that just because I'm German)
Oh boy, another skeleton shill thread
>Britain had to fight on the Western Front, in the Balkans, Turkey, Middle East, North Africa and in Africa proper. French soldiers fought in France. Wow!
France fought almost wherever the Brits fought though. At Gallipolli, there were as many French strewn across the Dardanels than there were Brits. In the Balkans, it was the French expeditionary force and the Serbian remnants that thwarted the Bulgarian push against Greece, and broke the back of them and the Austro-Hungarians. France and Britain exerted both as many efforts to occupy German Cameroun, and the Belgian and French in the end would come to perform better against German Tanzania. Of course, in the meantime, the British had to busy themselves with Kut and the Mesopatamian front, true... So your point was?...
The British were fantastic allies, but their "muh we did better than u silly frogs" diatribing everywhere can become a little too silly for my taste.
America, Canada, Australia and NZ are four colonies out of over 200
Singapore and HK are okay because they're city-states
LMalaysia is a third world shithole and India is the worst, most disgusting hellhole on Earth (dont make me post pics)
Fact is that British colonies (Iraq, Zimbabwe, Burma, Nigeria, Somalia, Guyana, Tanzania...etc) are on average as shitty as French ones, and much worse than Spanish ones
>Zimbabwe
Rhodesia was doing fine shit head. That ones on the niggers.
Also,
>muh German blockade only done by thhheeeee Briiiitiiiissh ships
When WWI struck both countries, each conformed to an agreement that less navy-preoccupied France would patrol the Mediterranean with their fleet, to launch offensives against both the Austrians and Ottomans, while it would inccur the more navy-based Britain to patrol the North Sea against the German
kriegsmarine.
Of course France, being confined to the Mediterranean as per the agreement, could've brought little to the German blockade you dimwit.
isn't the point of the film to depict how Ares is manipulating both sides?
Keep forgetting this is Sup Forums, home of retards and Reddit
carry on shitposting, I guess
>Iraq
>Bad
Saddam was doing good that ones on Bush&Blair.
>Saddam was doing good
Yeah, it was as far as third world dictature standards go
I still wouldnt call that a successful colony
Doesnt excuse the focus on Brits when French were the main nation on the Western Front
retards and reddit are literally the only people who discuss capeshit on the internet
Germans praised the French more than they did the British on the whole, even deriding that they'd have the Belgian police arrest the British military if ever it landed.
Hell, to this day, the French and Germans acknowledge the battle of Verdun to be the battle to symbolize the war for themselves, while only the British fellate themselves to the Somme, where it was a slaugther of their men charging at German positions.
I'd say that the French and British were equal allies though, what with the industrial output the British endowed on the Entente, especially since France's industrial regions were occupied by the Germans.
>Story by Zack Snyder
We're in good hands lads, no need to worry
>gems
>good goys
you retarded or something?
>Hell, to this day, the French and Germans acknowledge the battle of Verdun to be the battle to symbolize the war for themselves, while only the British fellate themselves to the Somme
This
I'm German, and here Verdun is seen as the worst and most intense battle of the war by far, while the Somme is barely talked about
Here's a nice docu about it for my German-speaking fellow
youtube.com
>hurr durr ebul german nazi
Thanktchu for shouldering me there Bochebro! ("German", but slang-ish, and has connotations usually with the Great War).
Am not German though. Only so avidly purveying the honor of France and shit here because I am one, but I'll try to see if the subbing system on YouTube lets me see it.
What are all these movies about the British fighting in WW1 that Hollywood supposedly pumps out?
Unrelated, but BF1 has four stories allotted to the British, and yet none to the French (discarded from the basegame), Germans, and Russians (discarded from the basegame).
Shouldn't each country, arguably the four countries to have contributed the greatest to the fighting, each have a story to them?
All of them
>
> Singapore
Literally just a single city (full of Chinese)
> Hong Kong
Same as above (but now belongs to the Chinese)
> Australia
America South
> Canada
America North
> New Zealand
Irrelevant Hobbits
> Malaysia
Shithole jungle full of Muslims
> Brunei
Shithole jungle full of Muslims (with oil)
> India
Seriously?
> Malta
Island gas station full of Dagos
> Cyprus
Turko-Greek-Dagos
> Barbados
Niggers
> United States of America
Only one of value out of the bunch
White Supremacy is a racist delusion
Anglo Supremacy is a historical fact
>Germans
Assault neutral country, then proceed to commit every warcrime in the book on its population
>English
Enter war to defend said country and prevent the war crimes.
its not really hard to see who the bad guy is
>Germans
Get war declared on them by Britain
>English
Declare war on Germany
>Germans
willingly declare war on a country guaranteed by the english
>English
honorable enough to uphold the guarantee
Don't worry krautbro, this is just a typical case of an anglo denying the truth in front of him
T. Frog
>English
>honorable
Germany was part of the treaty that guaranteed Belgium's neutrality too.
This site has nothing to offer anybody. There is no quality content you cannot get more quickly and efficiently elsewhere. This is an addiction which reduces your productivity, attention span, and free-time. You are becoming more bitter, narrow-minded, haughty, and old. Leave now and block this site. There is nothing here but slow, lonely suicide.
People do not have arguments here. Posters do not engage one another on key points, they nitpick with greentext and mock each other. Nobody is interested in the truth; people are battling for fleeting moments of superiority. Active commenters are loud jackasses who tumble into one internet fight after another, anxiously keeping ten tabs open to ensure they keep the last word in all of them. An insightful post is one in ten thousand, and no matter how hard you filter this place you are still searching for diamonds in a garbage dump.
This place is not making you happy. You are not having fun. You are not gathering stories to tell, learning, or growing as a person. Instead you chuckle every thirty minutes and are occasionally spurred to masturbation by libidinal posts or pictures. You are addicted to readily available information and pressure free social interaction. This place is slowly poisoning you with misogyny, narcissism, a false dichotomy surrounding normalfags, and insecurity.
I'm not telling you to be yourself. I'm not telling you to go outside. I'm not even telling you to make friends. Just leave Sup Forums. Do anything else.
This
Germany invaded Belgium to protect its neutrality from Britain
t. butthurt bong
>Lawrence of Arabia came out in 1962 and is not a Hollywood film.
>I assume you don't know the plot to War Horse.
>All The King's Men is not a war movie.
>Passchendaele is a Canadian film about a Canadian soldier.
>Legends of the Fall is not really a war movie at all, and the ex-solider it follows is an American living in America.
White Supremacy is a historical fact.
Should've gotten a strong Jewish woman
>Another mass media product about WW1 depicting Germans as the bad guys
So you are saying nazis weren't bad?
killing 20 million innocent jews somehow isn't a bad thing to you?
>killing 20 million innocent jews
>20 million
DUDE
french wwi uniforms aren't aesthetic enough to be featured in hollywood films
I personnally find them much better than British ones
Second best after German ones
No
>capeshit
ITT people who listened to the "Blueprint for Armageddon" series once and are now experts
nah the french were pretty tough in ww1, they just shit the bed so hard in ww2 that we still bug them about it.
>2 weeks
come on guys
.............end quote
> I don't have a basic understanding of history: the post
Most of what you said is wrong or misleading. Pretty sure I have seen you crying on Sup Forums, Sup Forums and /hist/ saying the exact same thing. Sad!
6 weeks actually
Still pathetic as fuck (although Brits should fuck off since they were there too and ran away)
Uh?
Most of what he said is right (except for Russia being more relevant than Britain in WW1, wtf)
This. They were too late for the party and wanted to have what French and British had, no matter the costs and in extreme speed.
>Wonder Woman beat WW1 German soldiers
>just stood by while WW2 German soldiers holocausted the shit out of the jews
really grinds your gears
No. He isn't.
Kingdom of heaven had American actors but essentially every character is French or German bar the king of England. As for other Medieval movies I can only think of drek specifically based in England, but that's not surprising because it's the Anglosphere and they don't overblow it's importance on a wider scale. England was the third most important state in Western Europe.
> inb4 muh Spain
Maybe by like 1400 they were bigger
The age of Sail, presumably he means the 18th century, is very much England's time to shine. Spain's empire declines whilst England's grows much larger.
The idea Russia in WW1 was more important is a joke. Anyway, Dr. Zhivago.
Napoleonic Redcoats WERE some of the best line infantry in Europe, the issue was there wasn't very many of them. I suggest Roger Knights book on the subject "organization of victory".
Why would Wonder Woman care about the Jews?
>bar the king of England
Who was French aq well anyway since the ruling family of England in that era was French
>Napoleonic Redcoats WERE some of the best line infantry in Europe
Then how come they got stalled for 6 fucking years against a secondary French army in Spain, when Russia reconquered all the way from Moscow to Paris in only two years against the main French army lead by Napoleon?
>the issue was there wasn't very many of them
Not really
On the one theater where they fought (Spain), Brits outnumbered the French most of the time
> that first para
Is this bait?
Napoleon's veteran army died in the winter, he had few reserves and both main German states jumped on him first chance they got. That's besides the Russians outnumbering him anyway of course.
Meanwhile the British had to train up the Portuguese and get their supply lines in order. Spain was a mini Russia and they didn't have the home field advantage. French numbers in the peninsular: 200,000 300,000
British and Portuguese numbers (at their highest): 80,000 with only perhaps half being British
The British and their allies had a slight advantage in some of the battles but that's superior planning, the French logistics didn't allow them to concentrate large forces for long. I am certain Marshal Marmont said something on that. Point being British consistently won and halted several French invasions of Portugal. The British won, I don't see how you can pretend they weren't effective.
Additionally British cavalry tactics, the sword used, was adopted by several other armies including the Prussians. Clearly they weren't incompetent.
Relevant to anything said how exactly?
>The British won, I don't see how you can pretend they weren't effective.
Not an argument
The British "won" because Russians and Germans dethroned Napoleon while Brits were doing useless shit in Spain
> ignoring every one of my points
Here's the last (you)
I suggest you look at the book I mentioned. You might learn something, at least you won't look like a retard who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.
>Right after the cancerous BF1
I never played BF1. How was the campaign? Supposedly you don't even play as the black guy on the cover?
I wonder how the next COD game campaign will be since that will be set in WW2.
>How was the campaign?
Waaaaaay too centered on Britain
Out of 5 "stories", 4 were from the pov of a British Empire character
Nothing about the Germans, nothing about the French, nothing about the Russians...shameful shit
>Supposedly you don't even play as the black guy on the cover?
There was an extremely short level with that African-American dude, and after that the whole game was basically about Brits
It was shit
lol
WW1 was literally the fault of Germans and their retarded cousin Austria
fun fact: mother russia in kick-ass 2 was played by an Israeli
No.
But it's cute that you think parity or accuracy are necessary or even valuable to marketing.
>a bunch of royalty all related to each other throughout various countries
>characterising them as different nationalities based solely on their house being founded in that country, even if they've been born and raised in England and intermixed for generations
come on now
Judeo-Bolshevism confirmed!
Richard the Lionheart barely set foot in England and primarily spoke French
Not for you, but all the normies out there will believe this shit
I distinctively recall Hitler calling you all sissy faggots
Hello is this the /Montreal/ general or the /One Sixty-Fourth German American/ one?
the british had the only professional army in the WW1. the french army was basically /r9k/ tier virgins drafted to die for their frog legs