Nope. I wasn’t looking for it. I was just reading a history of medieval warfare for the heck of it, and after a while, I found myself saying, in battle after battle, "Oh my gawd, the French are doing it again.” (But I can add to this that, right up into the last century, the French War College was still teaching that the secret of victory was—their word, not mine—“Élan”.) I really don’t have any personal feelings one way or the other—my father was busy with the OSS in China on D-Day.
"the abysmal stupidity of French generals. "
sorry and ok I won’t do that again, but that declaration was appearing so provocative to me that I sincerly thought it was trolling, you cannot just wrap up around 1500 years of wars just through this sentence (and especially if you try to understand what “French” really means in medieval times and before, for example English generals were French from 1066 if you wish to go this way :-)), sorry but History is much more complex than that, France exists for a long time and it is not just hazard if it has not been destroyed by all its neighbours during all these years,
but ok if it is a real discussion I am ok to go on with it,
“élan” basically means “momentum”, do you really think momentum is irrelevant to victory ?
Can’t find élan/elan meaning momentum in my computer’s dictionary, a crappy Oxford online (that doesn’t cost a mortgage to subscribe to), an online Webster’s or the Mirriam-Webster app on my iPad.
“Surge” is also a good translation if you want to get a little more modern warfare about it.
élan
[elɑ̃]
nom masculin
[dans une course] run-up, impetus
prendre son élan to take a run-up
saut avec/sans élan running/standing jump
[énergie] momentum
prendre de l'élan to gather speed ou momentum
être emporté par son propre élan (sens propre & figuré) to be carried along by one's own momentum
emporté par son élan, il a tout raconté à sa mère he got carried away and told his mother everything
[impulsion] impulse, impetus
donner de l'élan à une campagne to give an impetus to ou to provide an impetus for a campaign
[effusion] outburst, surge, rush
élans de tendresse surges ou rushes of affection
élan de générosité generous impulse
contenir les élans du cœur to check the impulses of one's heart
l'élan créateur creative drive
avec élan eagerly, keenly, enthusiastically
philosophie
l'élan vital the life force
zoologie elk, moose (US)
It also means vigour, zeal, ardour - and also connotes poise and elegant style etc - all of which could be relevant to the discussed usage.
I’d offer “drive” as a good translation of “elan” that gives the same connotation.
How did France lose WWI? Some French territory was occupied, but the French government of the Third Republic never surrendered and stayed in power throughout. They fielded considerable armies throughout the war, and were part of the Allies who imposed the Treaty of Versailles on Germany.
Yes, there were horrendous losses of French soldiers, but that was the same for all the participants in the war.
They “won” World War I, but got pounded pretty hard, almost lost their capital city, suffered massive casualties due to stupidly repeated infantry charges out of trenches, had several large mutinies, and would surely have lost outright had it not been British and later U.S. troops helping them. A better outcome for France than WWII, but not by much.
In my experience, I first heard jokes about the French not being militarily strong in the early 90’s, and they were at that time based entirely on the surrender of France in WWII after Germany went around the Maginot Line, with a little bit of the American Machismo perspective that French culture is more feminine - romance, food, etc. Pretty much a modern misunderstanding of the success of the Maginot Line and the incorrect belief here in the US that it was a failure because Hitler was able to force a complete surrender. As that was the most recent war involving France in any major way, that was more relevant in comedians’ minds than the centuries of French military might prior to WWII. The perception that it took the Americans joining the war to come to France’s rescue creates a mental narrative in American culture that France is weak militarily and the US is strong. Of course, the US military industrial system and funding has made the US dominant over everyone in the decades since, militarily, so there’s a certain attitude of looking down on anyone else’s military that comes along with that.
Those without an understanding of WWII politics often don’t realize that the success of the Maginot Line was that France was able to force Hitler to roll through the Neutral Belgium, which forced England’s hand to join the war - England was trying to stay out of it and making excuses but had made promises to Belgium. Had Hitler been able to roll THROUGH the Maginot Line instead of going around it (Italy tried this and failed) England would have had the political capital to pretend they weren’t concerned and could have stayed out of the war longer, allowing Hitler to grow even stronger.
What’s with the quotation marks? Yes, the French suffered enormously. Yes, Paris was threatened. Yes, France had strong allies. But at the end of the day, the Germans surrendered, and France got Alsace-Lorraine. How is that not a victory? And, more relevant to Dex’s earlier claim, how could you possibly call it a loss?
There has always been a big battle between the Anglos and the French. Both were two powerful empires who battled each other for supremacy. Almost all wars in Europe until the Franco-Prussian war were battles between England/Britain and France. Once Germany rose to power, the British anti-French leanings turned to anti-German leanings. A powerful Germany with its large navy and aggressive foreign policy was a larger threat to Britain than France.
France lost its supremacy around the end of the 18th century when their support for the Americans in the Revolutionary War almost bankrupted them. From then until the establishment of the Third Republic, France faced constant governmental turmoil and revolution. The fight between the Republicans, the Socialists, and the Royalists greatly weakened France. Even after the Third Republic was established, this fight between the left and right existed until the fall of the Vichy regime.
Before WWII, the U.S. was generally pro-French and France and the U.S always had a good relationship. This was due to the French help during the Revolutionary War. This changed after the Suez crisis. Britain decided the best way to maintain influence was to be tightly allied with the Americans and almost always support American policy. France decided it needed to show that it was still a major power and was independent of the U.S. This rankled the U.S. policy makers who felt that France’s independence hurt the united front the West needed to show the Soviet block. This frustration with France filtered down to the American public.
The latest Anti-French bashing was the result of the French refusal to support the Iraqi war. The Bush administration dismissed the French and other anti-war Europeans as the chocolate powers. That’s when you started seeing people on eBay selling white flags as The French Battle Flag and French Fries were officially renamed Freedom Fries in the U.S. Congress.
I know there’s a some anti-Americanism in France. As one French friend told me, it’s born mostly of jealousy. In the 18th century, France was the center of science, culture, design, cooking, and diplomacy. French was the language of the educated. Bit-by-bit, all of these attributes were taking over by a country that (in his words) doesn’t even know how to use a knife and fork!.
I didn’t call it a loss. I put “won” in quotation marks because it was, in many ways, a Pyrrhric victory, for all the reasons I stated - and by taking Alsace-Lorraine and imposing highly punitive conditions on Germany at Versailles, the French more than just about anyone laid the groundwork for their defeat in Round Two.
No, but Dex did. That last line was for him. (I realize that was unclear.)
Would you say that America only “won” the Revolutionary War, because Washington’s lads took heavy losses, lost New York and Philadelphia, would have lost the war outright without the help of the Spanish, the Dutch and the French, and failed to hinder the next war, in which the Brits came back strong and burned Washington D.C. to the ground?
[QUOTE=Steken;17236322[A]
nd [Washington] failed to hinder the next war, in which the Brits came back strong and burned Washington D.C. to the ground?
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, what’s thing thing about dying 12 whole years before the next war? Some leadership ability.
And the Brits did burn down Washington but did a poor job with it. We rebuilt it right after the war, and have suffered ever since.
Hey now, I wrote “Washington’s lads,” as in the Americans.
In any case, the point there was that a victory still counts a victory even if another war comes along a bunch of decades later.
No, England was already in the war. They declared war on Germany when it invaded Poland. The English expeditionary force was already in Northeastern France by that time. Remember Dunkirk?
The main problem was that the French and English declared war on Germany, but tried to be diplomatic about the whole thing. If they had truly invaded Germany as soon as they declared war, they could have taken the whole western bank of the Rhine River. Germany had no troops in Western Germany and German’s answer to the Maginot line, the Siegfried Line wasn’t even near completion. Germany would have had to call off its invasion of Poland, and the Soviet Union would have never had an excuse to invade. Such a failure could have even pushed the Nazis out of power.
Instead, the French and British forces sat around in what is called the phony war, waited until Germany finished off Poland, and sent their troops back to the French border. The English and French didn’t even run reconnaissance missions. One plane did overfly Germany, and noticed a large build up of troops, but that report was dismissed.
The hope was to blockade Germany into compliance. England’s army was in poor shape, and the French realized they didn’t have the manpower or resources that Germany had. The allied effort was also hindered by Belgium’s refusal to allow French troops access to their country. Belgium worried that French troops would merely pull their country into war with Germany.
I shipped, d’ye see, in a Revenue sloop,
And, off Cape Finisteere,
A merchantman we see,
A Frenchman, going free,
So we made for the bold Mounseer,
D’ye see?
We made for the bold Mounseer!
But she proved to be a Frigate - and she up with her ports,
And fires with a thirty-two!
It come uncommon near,
But we answered with a cheer,
Which paralysed the Parley-voo,
D’ye see?
Which paralysed the Parley-voo!
Then our Captain he up and he says, says he,
“That chap we need not fear, -
We can take her, if we like,
She is sartin for to strike,
For she’s only a darned Mounseer,
D’ye see?
She’s only a darned Mounseer!
But to fight a French fal-lal - it’s like hittin’ of a gal -
It’s a lubberly thing for to do;
For we, with all our faults,
Why, we’re sturdy British salts,
While she’s but a Parley-voo,
D’ye see?
A miserable Parley-voo!”
So we up with our helm, and we scuds before the breeze,
As we gives a compassionating cheer;
Froggee answers with a shout
As he sees us go about,
Which was grateful of the poor Mounseer,
D’ye see?
Which was grateful of the poor Mounseer!
And I’ll wager in their joy they kissed each other’s cheek
(Which is what them furriners do),
And they blessed their lucky stars
We were hardy British tars
Who had pity on a poor Parley-voo,
D’ye see?
Who had pity on a poor Parley-voo!
For the record, the term “cheese-eating surrender monkeys” came from an American cartoon show in 1995, spoken by a Scotsman as a joke playing on that UK vs France thing. It was only later adopted in a wave of patriotic craziness by insane people. Probably after it was used by Simpsons fans, some of whom still post here, to make fun of those insane people. It just shows that one man’s satire is another man’s world history text.
Hmm. Interesting, but I don’t think I buy the analogy. The U.S. came out of the Revolution in a lot better shape, relatively speaking, than France did from WWI.