Today is May fifth, which many Americans know is a Mexican holiday called by its Spanish name, Cinco de Mayo. It's not quite the equivalent of our Fourth of July, but it does celebrate a huge victory of Mexico over Napolean's French forces. The U.S. was fighting the Civil War, and France was backing the Slave States.
Some might object to celebrating Cinco de Mayo. But, as Kim dT pointed out, anything that celebrates a French military defeat is ok with me.
But what a day of glory for the French Foreign Legion ;-)
Comparing the defeat of French invaders of a Mexican town with the Alamo? I can think of two glaring differences.
The first, the Alamo was a group of Texans defending their homes, where as CAMERONE was a group of Frenchmen invading someones home.
The second, people (even Frenchmen) remember the Alamo.
Papertiger :
Yes it isn't comparable but I don't consider texas as home of the "texans". Texas belonged to Mexico after all... and the way the US waged war against Mexico to get texas, california, utah, new mexico etc., isn't glorious at all...
Au contrare
Texas was a republic long before it joined the United States. Texas not the Home of the Texans?
Do you read this stuff before you post it or what?
A brief summary of texan history here. Quite instructive for non American readers.
"But what a day of glory for the French Foreign Legion."
Does it strike anyone as kind of odd that the most respected branch of the french military is the one made up exclusively of non-french citizens? No, not odd, more pathetic and shameful.
I was waiting for this one... Not "exclusively" at all. All officers are French, about 25% of Legionnaires are French. Danjou was French (so was my uncle - FFL in Vietnam and Algeria). Pathetic and shameful my ass.
Membership
While most of its commissioned officers are French, the rest of the Legion is made up of men from a wide variety of nationalities (including French). After serving in the Legion for three years, the legionnaire is allowed to apply for French citizenship. A legionnaire, as the soldiers of the Legion are known, can enter the service under a pseudonym, and after four years of service can change his name at will.
For our American friends, nice little piece from Grouchy Old Cripple In Atlanta:
The French,
By Gary Brecher
The new big thing on the web is all these sites with names like "I Hate
France," with supposed datelines of French military history, supposedly
proving how the French are total cowards. Well, I'm going to tell you guys
something you probably don't want to hear: these sites are total bullshit,
the notion that the French are cowards is total bullshit, and anybody who
knows anything about European military history knows damn well that over the
past thousand years, the French have the most glorious military history in
Europe, maybe the world.
Before you send me more of those death threats, let me finish. I hate Chirac
too, and his disco foreign minister with the blow-dry 'do and the snotty
smile. But there are two things I hate more than I hate the French: ignorant
fake war buffs, and people who are ungrateful. And when an American mouths
off about French military history, he's not just being ignorant, he's being
ungrateful. I was raised to think ungrateful people were trash.
When I say ungrateful, I'm talking about the American Revolution. If you're
a true American patriot, then this is the war that matters. Hell, most of
you probably couldn't name three major battles from it, but try going back
to when you read Johnny Tremaine in fourth grade and you might recall a
little place called Yorktown, Virginia, where we bottled up Cornwallis's
army, forced the Brits' surrender and pretty much won the war.
Well, news flash: "we" didn't win that battle, any more than the Northern
Alliance conquered the Taliban. The French army and navy won Yorktown for
us. Americans didn't have the materiel or the training to mount a combined
operation like that, with naval blockade and land siege. It was the French
artillery forces and military engineers who ran the siege, and at sea it was
a French admiral, de Grasse, who kicked the shit out of the British navy
when they tried to break the siege.
Long before that, in fact as soon as we showed the Brits at Saratoga that we
could win once in a while, they started pouring in huge shipments of
everything from cannon to uniforms. We'd never have got near Yorktown if it
wasn't for massive French aid.
So how come you bastards don't mention Yorktown in your cheap webpages? I'll
tell you why: because you're too ignorant to know about it and too dishonest
to mention it if you did.
The thing that gets to me is why Americans hate the French so much when they
only did us good and never did us any harm. Like, why not hate the Brits?
They're the ones who killed thousands of Americans in the Revolution, and
thirty years later they came back and attacked us again. That time around
they managed to burn Washington DC to the ground while they were at it. How
come you web jerks never mention that?
Sure, the easy answer is because the Brits are with us now, and the French
aren't. But being a war buff means knowing your history and respecting it.
Well, so much for ungrateful. Now let's talk about ignorant. And that's what
you are if you think the French can't fight: just plain ignorant.
Appreciation of the French martial spirit is just about the most basic way
you can distinguish real war nerds from fake little teachers'pets.
Let's take the toughest case first: the German invasion, 1940, when the
French Army supposedly disgraced itself against the Wehrmacht. This is the
only real evidence you'll find to call the French cowards, and the more you
know about it, the less it proves. Yeah, the French were scared of Hitler.
Who wasn't? Chamberlain, the British prime minister, all but licked the
Fuhrer's goosesteppers, basically let him have all of Central Europe,
because Britain was terrified of war with Germany. Hell, Stalin signed a
sweetheart deal with Hitler out of sheer terror, and Stalin wasn't a man who
scared easy.
The French were scared, all right. But they had reason to be. For starters,
they'd barely begun to recover from their last little scrap with the
Germans: a little squabble you might've heard of, called WW I.
WW I was the worst war in history to be a soldier in. WW II was worse if you
were a civilian, but the trenches of WW I were five years of Hell like
General Sherman never dreamed of. At the end of it a big chunk of northern
France looked like the surface of the moon, only bloodier, nothing but
craters and rats and entrails.
Verdun. Just that name was enough to make Frenchmen and Germans, the few who
survived it, wake up yelling for years afterward. The French lost 1.5
million men out of a total population of 40 million fighting the Germans
from 1914-1918. A lot of those guys died charging German machine-gun nests
with bayonets. I'd really like to see one of you office smartasses joke
about "surrender monkeys" with a French soldier, 1914 vintage. You'd piss
your dockers.
Shit, we strut around like we're so tough and we can't even handle a few
uppity Iraqi villages. These guys faced the Germans head on for five years,
and we call them cowards? And at the end, it was the Germans, not the
French, who said "calf rope."
When the sequel war came, the French relied on their frontier fortifications
and used their tanks (which were better than the Germans', one on one)
defensively. The Germans had a newer, better offensive strategy. So they
won. And the French surrendered. Which was damn sensible of them.
This was the WEHRMACHT. In two years, they conquered all of Western Europe
and lost only 30,000 troops in the process. That's less than the casualties
of Gettysburg. You get the picture? Nobody, no army on earth, could've held
off the Germans under the conditions that the French faced them. The French
lost because they had a long land border with Germany. The English survived
because they had the English Channel between them and the Wehrmacht. When
the English Army faced the Wermacht at Dunkirk, well, thanks to spin the
tuck-tail-and-flee result got turned into some heroic tale of a brilliant
British retreat. The fact is, even the Brits behaved like cowards in the
face of the Wermacht, abandoning the French. It's that simple.
Here's a quick sampler of some of my favorite French victories, like an
antidote to those ignorant websites. We'll start way back and move up to the
20th century.
Tours, 732 AD: The Muslims had already taken Spain and were well on their
way to taking the rest of Europe. The only power with a chance of stopping
them was the French army under Charles "the Hammer" Martel, King of the
Franks (French), who answered to the really cool nickname "the Hammer of
God." It was the French who saved the continent's ass. All the smart money
was on the Muslims: there were 60,000 of them, crazy Jihadis whose cavalry
was faster and deadlier than any in Europe. The French army was heavily
outnumbered and had no cavalry. Fighting in phalanxes, they held against
dozens of cavalry charges and after at least two days of hand-to-hand
combat, finally managed to hack their way to the Muslim center and kill
their commander. The Muslims retreated to Spain, and Europe developed as an
independent civilization.
Orleans, May 1429: Joan of Arc: is she the most insanely cool military
commander in history or what? This French peasant girl gets instructions
from her favorite saints to help out the French against the English
invaders. She goes to the King (well, the Dauphin, but close enough) and
tells him to give her the army and she'll take it from there. And somehow
she convinces him. She takes the army, which has lost every battle it's been
in lately, to Orleans, which is under English siege. Now Joan is a nice
girl, so she tries to settle things peaceably. She explains in a letter to
the enemy commanders that everything can still be cool, "...provided you
give up France...and go back to your own countries, for God's sake. And if
you do not, wait for the Maid, who will visit you briefly to your great
sorrow." The next day she put on armor, mounted a charger, and prepared to
lead the attack on the besiegers' fortifications. She ordered the gates
opened, but the Mayor refused until Joan explained that she, personally,
would cut off his head. The gates went up, the French sallied out, and Joan
led the first successful attack they'd made in years. The English
strongpoints were taken, the siege was broken, and Joan's career in the
cow-milking trade was over.
Braddock's Defeat (aka Battle of Monongahela) July 1755: Next time you're
driving through the Ohio Valley, remember you're passing near the site of a
great French victory over an Anglo-American force twice its size. General
Edward Braddock marched west from Virginia with 1,500 men--a very large army
in 18th-c. America. His orders were to seize French land and forts in the
Valley--your basic undeclared land-grab invasion. The French joined the
local tribes to resist, and then set up a classic ambush. It was a
slaughter. More than half of Braddock's force--880 men--were killed or
wounded. The only Anglo officer to escape unhurt was this guy called George
Washington, and even he had two horses shot out from under him. After a few
minutes of non-stop fire from French and Indians hidden in the woods,
Braddock's command came apart like something out of Nam, post-Tet. Braddock
was hit and wounded, but none of his troops would risk getting shot to
rescue him.
Austerlitz, Dec. 1805: You always hear about Austerlitz as "Napoleon's
Greatest Victory," like the little guy personally went out and wiped out the
combined Russian and Austrian armies. The fact is, ever since the Revolution
in 1789, French armies had been kicking ass against everybody. They were
free citizens fighting against scared peasant and degenerate mercenaries,
and it was no contest. At Austerlitz, 65,000 French troops took on 90,000
Russians and Austrians and destroyed them. Absolutely annihilated them. The
French lost only 8,000, compared to 29,000 of the enemy. The tactics
Bonaparte used were very risky, and would only have worked with superb
troops: he encouraged the enemy to attack a weak line, then brought up
reinforcements who'd been held out of sight. That kind of tactical plan
takes iron discipline and perfect timing--and the French had it.
Jena, Oct. 1806: just a quick reminder for anybody who thinks the Germans
always beat the French. Napoleon takes on the Prussian army and destroys it.
27,000 Prussian casualties vs. 5,000 French. Prussian army routed, pursued
for miles by French cavalry.
You, guys might want to remember that the French under Napoleon are still
the only army ever to have taken all of continental Europe, from Moscow to
Madrid. I could keep listing French victories till I had a book. In fact,
it's not a bad idea. A nice big hardback, so you could take it to the
assholes running all the anti-French-military sites and bash their heads in
with it.
Happy Cinquo De Mayo!
That was so funny zoomerx!
Gary Brecher is actually Mark Ames from the Exile. Gary Brecher is a fictitious person. He does not exist. Oh yeah, Ames is also a dope.
The Exile used to be funny, before Ames got his hands on it and tried to turn it into The Onion meets Pravda meets the Weekly World News all with a hard Left slant.
http://www.exile.ru/
Sorry Zoomerx, I didn’t see the dates June 22,1940, or June 24, 1940, in the rant above.
Uh, Zoomer.
I didn't see any mention of how the French still hold the lion's share of North America either. Oh, that's right, the Brits took it away from them... twice! Once after giving it back for some reason.
Besides, lots of people win battles and lose wars. The way you could tell in the old days was to see what language the people on the site of the battle were speaking a few years on.
Read this one, it's not bad. It was written by Kristoff, who hates Bush and could write for Le Monde without making too many polliwogs angry. Google his other columns if you don't believe me.
Iranians have many kind words for Americans
I liked the last paragraph. He has you Europeans nailed.
Zoomer
Don't listen to them. Your guys are brave and we're sorry for calling you surrender monkeys.
To tell the truth, I was never comfortable with the French coward crap anyhow. I don't like arguing from a losing position. I remember the maps from elementary school, with the whole swath of Africa colored purple, with the name FRENCH NORTH AFRICA printed on it.
More then that, pretending France is impotent militarily doesn't allow us to highlight abuses and cynical usery by the French Government, such as has been going on in the Ivory Coast for the last 150 years.
I suppose the latest example of France using the bully tactic would be in Tiawan, but there are many examples in recent history. Haiti comes to mind. Ditto the African seats on the UN, all of which were forced to parrot the script sent down by Villipin when the Dolt, Tony Blair, convinced Bush to try for a second resolution.
I don't think we can call France cowardly beyond their media. French media is pretty craven.
Evil and self serving is a more apt discription of the French Government, yup that's much better.
Gary Brecher is actually Mark Ames from the Exile
I couldn't care less who he is. His remarks are accurate.
Oh yeah, Ames is also a dope.
So his facts are wrong.... Typical.
Besides, lots of people win battles and lose wars.
Sure. 100 years Franco/English war, WW1 etc... come on, de-programmer, it just bothers you to give the French a little break.
And thanks for your kind comment, papertiger....
As it happens, the diatribe about WWI was way off the mark. What people do not realise is that during WWI the French army went on strike. The British had to cover for them, along with the other allies, because the French refused to fight after taking heavy losses.
They were the only army to break in WWI, despite atrocious losses on all sides. Everyone else had the fortitude to continue, but the French bottled out. Had the outcome of WWI been up to the French army, we would all be speaking German.
How do you say coward?
bullshit
Since it may be too difficult for you to read a book on WW1, you could at least watch Paths of Glory (yeah, it's an American movie!)
As it happens, the diatribe about WWI was way off the mark. What people do not realise is that during WWI the French army went on strike.
Unbeleivable.
Yes, mutiny happened in a few instances. In other instances, it was the Brits who bailed out on the French. It was not about cowardness. It was the most horrible war ever, a "modern" war fought with old style tactics. The French were the first victims of mustard gaz. I defy anyone to visit Verdun and come back unmoved by what the French went through, as well as all others (including Germans). The supreme commander of the allied forces was Foch, perharps France's last brilliant general.
Polwarth, you uneducated asshole.
Had the outcome of WWI been up to the French army, we would all be speaking German.
Did you say "way off the mark?
American troops came four years after Germany, England and France nearly exterminated each other. Easy to criticize from your laptop, eh?
Let's take the toughest case first: the German invasion, 1940, when the French Army supposedly disgraced itself against the Wehrmacht. This is the only real evidence you'll find to call the French cowards
I would not choose this example to call the “soldiers” cowards—120,000 brave men were NOT killed running away. Rather, the blame should be put upon mediocre Third Republic leaders, poor French army leaders with poor planning and even worse execution of that planning, and, finally, the pacifist public opinion of the French citizens.
General Andre Beaufre said in his book 1940-The Fall of France “the French Army was nothing more that a vast, inefficient tool, incapable of quick reaction or adaptation”. It was designed as a tool for defense only, relying on the Maginot Line, which, remarkably, did not even extend across the Belgian frontier. The army leaders assumed that a stalwart defense, diversionary thrusts into Germany, and a blockade of Germany would bring victory. How wrong they were.
OK, for all you “Gaullists” out in frogland, yes, de Gaulle, perhaps, with his 1934 book Vers l’armée de métier (have any of you frogs read this book?) brought up a lot of the shortcoming of the French military, but it was generally ignored. He proposed more and faster tanks, etc. and an elite army of 100,000 men. Alexander Werth in De Gaulle, a Political Biography makes a point that de Gaulle’s ideas and army still would not have been able to have saved France in 1940 because of Germany’s “immense superiority over France in human and economic resources. What is certain, however, is that if at least part of such a striking force had been available in 1936, it could have prevented Hitler’s re-occupation of the Rhineland, and so the war itself.” Interesting thought, there.
OK, my other two points were the poor leaders of the Third Republic, and the pacifism of the French public. But I’ve rambled on too long already, and you frogs most likely know this anyway. But, you US readers, I would suggest the book From Versailles to Vichy, The Third French Republic, 1919-1940 by Nathanael Green. Goes into all of that, and is only about 120 pages so it’s a quick read. WOW, only $1.97 at Amazon Here used, out of print.
Good points, andy. I also read somewhere that a few months before Poland's fall, a French daily published a commentary honoring the French army's uniform as the "most elegant in the world"...
Two interesting articles in todays Washington Times about 50th year anniversary of the battle at Dien Bien Phu. Both worth reading, I think.
and from this article,
Colonel recalls
a great quote:
"We were not fighting to defend our homes, we were not fighting to chase a foreigner from our land, we were not even fighting to keep Indochina for France. Then why? The honor of the profession of arms, and that is all."
'American troops came four years after Germany, England and France nearly exterminated each other.'
Coming from a Frenchman, I can't tell if this is criticism or admiration.
Coming from a Frenchman, I can't tell if this is criticism or admiration.
Not a criticism nor admiration. But saying you saved our asses" in WW1 is a little bit like watching a friend fight until he collapses, then picking him up and claiming credit to save his life ;-)
But thanks, sincerely,
Let me point out that France lost this battle, but they WON the war. They came back a year later would defeat the Mexicans and go into mexico city unopposed. Their 4 year occupation was only cut short due to having to divert resources back to Europe due to Prussia's growing strength.
"WW1 is a little bit like watching a friend fight until he collapses"
How is this any different than your attitude toward Iraq? Oh, that's right, Arabs are subhuman and can't operate democratically. I keep forgetting.
Iraq is totally different. WWI was "wait till the worst is done, then try to come in and clean up". Iraq was "wait till the war is done, then complain that you can't profit off it."
Tangent - do French children hear the story of Henny Penny baking bread, or is that one confined to the English-speaking world?
