Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#1 - sinclairr (12/08/2013) [-]
"Forced the French to surrender"

Like they weren't going to do it, anyways
User avatar #200 to #1 - xtwinblade ONLINE (12/09/2013) [-]
"HURRDURR FRENCH COWARDS HURR DURR WHITE IS NATIONAL FLAG HURRDURR" haha yea because **** you thats not old as **** .

The french werent the only country to surrender, and considering they were already pinned down it would have been pointless to just kill off 500 000 soldiers trying to take it back and lose.

seems like nobody remembers all the things Napoleon did or how the french helped out america in the revolutionary war.

Like holy **** , its a joke from 1945 for ***** sake.
#128 to #1 - feupy ONLINE (12/09/2013) [-]
Doesn't this get old ?
French weren't forced to surrender indeed, they had to "choose" between
- you fight, we obviously beat you, decimate your people, smash your buildings and your art, and we take the remaining Jews
- you surrender, we take the Jews.
And they surrendered. Silly pussies eh ?
#229 to #128 - sinclairr (12/09/2013) [-]
Seriously, it's just a joke.    
If you want to discuss real history, the French people were the best at sabotaging German defenses. Half the bridges blown up in WW2 in France were due to the French, not the Germans. They fought even against terrible odds, and probably had the strongest backbone in the world to fight the Nazi's like that.
Seriously, it's just a joke.

If you want to discuss real history, the French people were the best at sabotaging German defenses. Half the bridges blown up in WW2 in France were due to the French, not the Germans. They fought even against terrible odds, and probably had the strongest backbone in the world to fight the Nazi's like that.
#142 to #128 - anonymous (12/09/2013) [-]
Found the french guy
#159 to #142 - feupy ONLINE (12/09/2013) [-]
Congratulations !

I'm not really mad, and even less proud of what happened. But it is simply inaccurate to say they weren't forced to surrender. It's a terrible thing to say, but when you're at the head of a government, you sometimes have to take the less worse decision, even if it is a bad decision.
User avatar #185 to #159 - averagemcgee (12/09/2013) [-]
Don't try to justify the cowardice that the French government took.
User avatar #193 to #185 - feupy ONLINE (12/09/2013) [-]
I'm not trying to justify anything. I'm not an expert either, if you have arguments, instead of tirelesly repeating pussy and coward, please explain to me what could have been a better solution. I would be genuinely interested in hearing it.
User avatar #105 to #1 - kievaughnb (12/09/2013) [-]

France had a military track record that should make us war-mongering Americans **** ourselves in admiration.
#217 to #105 - anonymous (12/09/2013) [-]
wooo so mad...
User avatar #70 to #1 - hydraetis (12/09/2013) [-]
Because it's much better that they drag out the fight and get the rest of their cities destroyed and thus millions more of their own people killed. I actually respect them for having the intelligence to surrender, rather than being brash idiots looking for a false sense of glory.
#204 to #70 - therealsupanova (12/09/2013) [-]
why are you ignoring the fact that surrender meant essentially handing over every french Jew for the Nazi's to exterminate? How can you condone a government betraying its own people so wholeheartedly
User avatar #245 to #204 - hydraetis (12/11/2013) [-]
Would you rather surrender and have to hand over a portion of your population or keep fighting, get half your population killed, then be forced to hand over what little would be left?
#247 to #245 - therealsupanova (12/11/2013) [-]
I would rather keep fighting, and no, that would not mean getting "half your population killed" lets not be melodramatic please.
User avatar #250 to #247 - hydraetis (12/12/2013) [-]
Uh, yea. It would. You clearly do not seem to understand how hard Germany was hammering the Allies before they turned on Russia.
#251 to #250 - therealsupanova (12/13/2013) [-]
I understand perfectly. My point stands - stop exaggerating.
User avatar #17 to #1 - painispleasure (12/09/2013) [-]
well, you say that, but it wasn't actually Charles De Gaulle who signed France over to the Nazi's. it was a man called Petain, and without going into too much detail about the history of it, Petain could be described as worse than some of the Nazi officers that over saw the take over of Paris
#55 to #17 - bann (12/09/2013) [-]
Or the man who saved Paris and most of France from being smashed to a pulp and inevitably surrendering anyways.
#170 to #55 - anonymous (12/09/2013) [-]
Vichy France of Pétain was a terrible place to be, with militias hunting every possible jew, resistant or whatever they wanted to kill. There where great poverty because every remaining French worker was sent to Germany to work in factories ... There were no resource, no industry, because everything was took by the Nazis ...

Pétain was a dictator, and the worst thing that could happen to France in its entire history. That's a fact, not an opinion.
#207 to #170 - anonymous (12/09/2013) [-]
or he saved a bunch of people by not fighting a lost cause, you might want to read your history books by the way, he caused way less misery than napoleon did in his first year of conquest.
User avatar #7 to #1 - irishhappyposter (12/08/2013) [-]
that was the first time they surrendered and how they got their reputation you r3etarded fish ****
User avatar #10 to #7 - chrisel (12/08/2013) [-]
The got their reputation by surrendering in WW II so fast but they already surrendered in after 10 months in the Franco-Prussian war from 1870 to 1871
User avatar #79 to #10 - ruebezahl (12/09/2013) [-]
Yes, because the other European countries did soooo extremely well during WW2. Except for the Soviet Union, the only countries that did not surrender immediately against Germany all had the benefit of being separated from Germany by the sea.

And look at those nordic countries for example. Some of them surrendered at the mere sight of the first German panzer.
User avatar #160 to #79 - chrisel (12/09/2013) [-]
France had pretty good army and had time to prepare and wasn't outnumbered as much as the other nations did and surrendered relatively fast compared to the smaller nations. Norway surrendered 62 days after declaration of war, they made smart use of the climate.
Denmark knew a war would only cause hostility from Germans to the danish population and evacuated a lot of Jews to help the allies and still make the Germans ''like'' Denmark
the Netherlands surrendered after only 5 days because the German air force bombed Rotterdam after it surrendered and threatened to bomb the other cities if the dutch army didn't surrendered but some allied troops kept fighting in the province of Zealand 2 days longer
Belgium surrendered in 14 days because everything was occupied.
Luxembourg surrendered nearly immediately because they barely had an army.
Poland surrendered after 35 days but they were invaded from 2 sides.
Greece surrendered after 24 days but their army was already damaged from an earlier invasion.
And France surrendered after only 33 days and has lost over 2 million soldiers.
so I think that France could have done better in WW II event though it didn't do it that bad.
User avatar #5 to #1 - fourtwentt (12/08/2013) [-]
Not since the accident
 Friends (0)