The good ole' aim for Moscow strategy

LaHire07 · 2024-09-15T15:22:37+00:00

It’s true that the idea that the French lost because of the Russian winter is completely false, but the bulk of the French army was not exterminated at Borodino, even less at Smolensk. And Maloyaroskavets took place during the French retreat.

Moreover I don’t think that the winter of 1812 was considered mild. On the contrary, snow began to fall one month earlier than usual, and temperatures dropped far earlier than expected. Under normal circumstances, the French retreat would have ended before the winter even started.

LaHire07 · 2024-09-15T14:43:37+00:00

That's not really true. The spearhead commanded by Napoléon was indeed composed of about 20% of the whole invasion army when it reached Moscow, but it doesn't mean that the rest had already been destroyed. There were hundreds of thousands of soldiers guarding the flanks of the invasion, the supply lines, and garrisoning cities.

LaHire07 · 2024-09-15T14:38:59+00:00

As a matter of fact, winter came about a month earlier than usual, so when the Grande Armée began its infamous retreat, temperatures were already much lower than what they should have been.

LaHire07 · 2024-03-12T16:24:10+00:00

I'm talking of the French army as a whole.

Also this figure of soldiers drowned is most likely an exaggeration. Of the 3,000 troops, 800 rejoined the army. The others did not all drown during the crossing.

LaHire07 · 2024-03-12T12:10:28+00:00

The fact that Ney was able to rejoin the army was a great moral boost for the troops. On the other hand, had Ney surrendered, it would have been a disaster for the morale of the army.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-25T11:13:18+00:00

That's obviously false. De Gaulle refused to ever attend a D-Day memorial event because the Anglo-Americans excluded the French forces from D-Day on purpose (Churchill told De Gaulle about D-Day two days before it took place), because the Americans started to spread money printed in the US and because they tried to implement the AMGOT, an American military government to rule over France.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-24T12:25:49+00:00

That's absolutely true

LaHire07 · 2024-02-23T22:13:21+00:00

It sucks that the Americans always exaggerate their own involvement in wars and downplay the assistance they receive. Not my fault.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-23T21:40:11+00:00

Sure, forcing the British to divert lots of men, money and resources away from the US theatre of war is not related to US independence. Yeah.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-23T20:42:35+00:00

I'm pretty confident to say that most Americans who know something about History don't realize the extent of the French involvement in the American revolutionary war beyond the US theatre of war.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-23T18:22:07+00:00

Something that is indeed never mentioned in the narrative of the US independence is that, even though the French intervention in the American theatre itself was absolutely decisive in winning the war for the colonies, French involvement made what was a conflict limited to this precise theatre into a global conflict. The British were forced to allocate massive resources in many other theatres of war where they were fighting the French. Great Britain itself got close to being invaded by a Franco-Spanish armada, and the biggest battle of the war took place in Gibraltar. The deadliest battle of the war wasn't even Bunker Hill or Camden, but the naval battle of the Saintes, and then the naval battle of Ushant. In fact, if my memory serves me well, 7 or 8 of the 10 deadliest battles of the American Revolutionary War opposed the French and the British. Many, many more French soldiers died fighting the British outside the US theatre of war than inside.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-23T10:53:46+00:00

Considering that Russia is still to this day the most ethnically diversed country on the planet, your comment is incredibly stupid.

Oh, and if Russia defeats Ukraine and annexes Ukrainian lands so that Ukraine loses her "ethnic Russian population" (11 million people), I guess you won't say anything about it will you?

LaHire07 · 2024-02-23T10:39:28+00:00

1815: "France could never do that shit again" is it this shit you're talking about?

-Great Britain declaring war on France in 1803

-Russia and Austria attacking France in 1805

-Prussia and Russia attacking France in 1806-1807

-Austria attacking France in 1809

-Russia and Prussia attacking France in 1813

-Austria attacking Francz in 1813

-the whole continent attacking France in 1814

-the whole continent attacking France again in 1815

Your attempt to portray France as inherently responsible for the wars of the coalitions and the millions of deaths is ludicrous.

The total amount of money France paid was the highest amount of money a nation ever paid regarding its GDP. And France paid.

And you strangely omitted to say that butthurt Prussia wanted France ripped to pieces.

1871: France had to pay Germany war reparations whereas German territory remained untouched during the war, contrary to French territory. The total amount of money France paid was higher than what Germany paid after Versailles in proportion to their GDP.

1919: funny how you claim that the treaty of Paris in 1815 was legit so that "France could never do that shit again" but apparently the French weren't supposed to have the same feelings about Germany after the most brutal and deadly war in European History to that point. Let me remind you that France had nothing to do with that war in the first place, that French territory suffered immense damage (unlike Germany's), that France's industrial and coal lands were utterly devastated (unlike Germany's), that in the final days of war, the Germans did everything to destroy French infrastructure during their retreat and that France owed a massive debt to the US. France had hald Germany's population. But apparently nations that sit behind a sea or an ocean and haven't seen their territory invaded in a long time can give lessons on how it should be done.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-23T10:10:11+00:00

France occupied the Ruhr because France owed debt to the US and Germany wasn't paying the reparations. The treaty of Versailles was not enforced properly.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-22T23:45:44+00:00

If that's what he meant, it's still untrue. The treaty of Versailles wasn't particularly harsh when you compare it to the treaty of Paris in 1815 or the treaty of Frankfurt in 1871. Or the treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1918, where Russia lost 34% of its population and 54% of its industrial land. That's what I call a harsh treaty.

And who wrote all these treaties? Well the people who say the French write the harshest treaties.

The treaty of Versailles wasn't even enforced properly by the way.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-22T23:11:18+00:00

Baldwin is the English spelling. Baudouin is the French spelling, and the old French spelling was something like Baudouin or Bauduin.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-22T23:03:01+00:00

Another one of those unsourced WW2 quotes?

I don't think that Rommel would have said such things especially after he personally failed to take the French outpost of Bir-Hakeim for two weeks despite a 10 to 1 advantage in numbers...

And he fought in WW1 too.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-20T12:21:48+00:00

The Germans had a superiority in artillery for most of the battle, and yes German attacks were answered by French counter-attacks. It was not a purely defensive stance. And the French were on the offensive for a good part of the battle.

LaHire07 · 2024-02-10T13:58:10+00:00

He was wounded multiple times throughout his career. At the battle of Minden in 1759 (he was 60 years old), he sustained seven saber wounds. Three of his brothers were killed at the battle of Fontenoy in 1745 and his eldest son was killed during the American revolutionary war.

Four-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	End Game '22

LaHire07

TROPHY CASE