Posted on 07/22/2017 9:06:51 AM PDT by BenLurkin
;)
Actually, the Dutch were much worse than the French in terms of collaboration, but they get credit for hiding Anne Frank (but then again, who betrayed her?)
Jacques is entirely correct. The Brits think they are the only ones who won the war. It gets very tiresome!
Ohh, French Whine....
I agree LS. We saw it yesterday and I came close to leaving the theatre. Whoever did the editing on that film must have been on drugs. There was absolutely no cohesion. If you went into the movie with no knowledge of the events you came out the same way. Seriously disappointed.
There are a lot of Americans, and especially Russians, who believe their countries were the only ones who won the war.....It was indeed a team effort.
Everyone in WWI did the same, the Germans and Americans not excluded.
Eastwood’s making a movie about it using the actual Americans who stopped the attack.
Don't get me started about how the Brits compare El Alamain to Stalingrad in it's impact on the war...
Their War Museum used to have an entire wing dedicated to Montgomery.
“I know I’m a prima donna. I admit it. What I can’t stand about Monty is, he won’t admit it.” - Patton
Why wasn’t the “Great French Republic” defended to the bitter end and then some by it’s citizens? >:(
.......................................................
It was defended by many who were able to escape and further the French fight with de Gaulle, and many others who stayed and enabled the success of the Allied Invasion! My husband was in the French underground and without his group slowing the advance of Das Reich,the 2nd Division Panzers, the Normandy landings could have failed. That is, ACCORDING TO DWIGHT EISENHOWER! Ever heard of him?
Thanks. I know I’m not alone. Agree on the editing. I didn’t mention Hans Zimmer’s music, which was PERFECT in “Dark Knight Rises,” but the monotone air raid siren approach was irritating and distracting.
So without the French, you’d be speaking Brit now. You’d also have no rights beyond that of a serf.
Good. Never like to see historical pictures bomb.
History and accuracy and the record are at the mercy of Hollywood producers on both, or all, sides of the political spectrum.
Throwing a bone to the sacrifice made by the French is not too much to ask.
After all French boys were at the mercy of their efete leadership, but they were there, nevertheless.
Funny enough, one of the previews at our theater was about the film coming up later this year with Gary Oldham as Churchill, on the "dark days" of the war when it was a crap shoot as to who would win. Guess which speech was in the trailer?
You seem to bve proud of your ignorance! Learn some history!
>Don’t get me started about how the Brits compare El Alamain to Stalingrad in it’s impact on the war...
The victory at El Alamain was more important than Stalingrad. Lose it and Rommel takes Alexandra and the Suez Canal and the oil fields of the middle east. From there they could take Persia and cut the main US Russian supply line and put there Bombers in range of the oil fields of Baku.
Stalingrad bagged a bunch midtier German troops and allies and a really bad German field general. The losses from Tunisia a few months later were much more harmful to Germany in terms of men, weapons, and moral than was Stalingrad.
Stalingrad gets played up far more than it should because of wartime Russian propaganda.
The TRUTH IS that without the French defending the Brits, they would not have escaped. Thousands of French were left behind and encircled had to surrender.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.