Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Alex Smart
France was not the only country to be beaten for there were three others including the UK,
The United kingdom was NOT BEATEN
- Obviously you did not read my post carefully Alex. To be beaten an army needs not fight on its own soil and its country (here : Britain) needs not be invaded by the enemy. For example Japan was totally beaten long before even one single enemy soldier put a foot on the "sacred" Japanese soil, if we except Okinawa, which the Japs consider their own but I understand the original inhabitants don't quite agree (same thing between imperialist England and Ireland - are you going to dispute that Ireland is not England?).
Every historian in the world will confirm for you that 1940 Germany beat the UK as well as France, the NL and Belgium - all four together actually. Every Englishman knows perfectly well that the UK had virtually nothing to resist a German invasion on the ground in July-September 1940.The UK fleet and Air Force were still able to put up a very good fight, which they did. The same is true of the French fleet and air force. The only difference between both countries, which both were totally beaten (the UK more than France) is that the French Channel prevented German troops and tanks from invading, that's all. Don't be all too proud and arrogant because a little sea strait protected you from invasion. This is not your own merit.
In a boxing fight if one of the guys feels he's losing and flees, and hides behind the changing-room, he can't claim he was NOT beaten! Everybody will tell you that. I agree. It applies to the 1940 UK too.
One of the main anti-French liars certainly was Peter Townsend. His disgusting attack(s) were particularly noxious because he was a well-known RAF hero of WW II, or so he told us
Peter Townsend was awarded a DFC in April 1940 . was shot down into the sea twice and was then awarded a bar to the DFC on 6th Sept 1940.
- Being shot down into the sea twice is no evidence of heroism but of clumsiness and poor value as a fighter pilot, and also of luck in this case for he survived. Everybody knows that to get the DFC you only needed to be an officer and wait for a little time. It was automatic and proves nothing (same remark for the French Croix de Guerre and Légion d'Honneur : some really deserved it, some did not).
This traitor - Peter Townsend was NEVER a Traitor, to Britain or its people.
- He was a traitor to his French allies in the war. This disgusting person lived in France for several decades, enjoying France, her friendly inhabitants, her wines, cheeses and other excellent food so appreciated by British people, her whole civilisation and way of life (often much more pleasant than the English one, especially on Sundays...), marrying a Frenchwoman and LIVING in and on the country. He probably was a French citizen (and still a British one at the same time) too. What do you call a bastard who enjoys all this and still insults some of the most heroic inhabitants of the country in the meanest way?
Obviously Mr. Alex Smart ist not THAT smart for he knows virtually nothing on 1940 events. Let me remind you of this : taking the duration into account, French fighter pilots (those libelled and heavily insulted by Townsend) had exactly as many of their number killed in combat as Fighter Command in the BoB. The latter were not as "few" as the legend tells us. There was a grand total of approx. 1,000 fighter pilots who fought within the FRENCH AF in May-June 1940 including about 180 Poles and 110 Czechs (several of them are among the top-ranking "French" aces so nobody "stole" their victories). The corresponding number for the BoB and the RAF is over 2,000. So in fact the French fighter pilot's loss rate was twice as high as the RAF's in the BoB - not because they were not good but because they fought so heroically. The German losses, too, were twice as high over France as over Britain, taking the duration into account. So WHO fought better and braver against the Luftwaffe? It was the French. See Williamson Murray's figures in "Luftwaffe - Strategy for Defeat".
But you AS answered nothing about the libelling of French aircrew. There is nothing you could say either.
He was a filthy phoney.
Townsend was NO phoney.
His scoreboard shows otherwise
1/3rd share in the First German a/c shot down onto British soil.
Total of 9 and 2 Shared Destroyed, 2 probables and 4 Damaged.
- Now it has become clear and plain that RAF fighter pilots' overclaim rate was approx. 5:1 (see D. Caldwell's history of JG 26 and similar sources). This leaves about 2 authentic victories to Townsend in 6 years of war - let's say 3 to be generous. Many French pilots won 2-16 victories in but 5 WEEKS. But I am not blaming Townsend. He took part in the fighting and, what's more, he led his squadron. He did his job just like the others, this is all right. He IS a phoney because of the rest of his life, after WW II, and what he said and published. Absolutely repulsive.
I suspect it was such a shock to him that Buckingham Palace refused to allow him to marry his Margaret that he was mentally disturbed and "needed" somebody, or people, to punch in order to relax a little. He chose to insult thousands of heroic French airmen. He knew they were much too nice and friendly and would not harm him. They did not, which I can't understand. Sometimes the French really are STUPID.
Just visit the graves! Do you really think that about 150 French fighter pilots out of 1,000 (not to mention other aircrew) were killed in their shelters and hideouts within 5 weeks?
What is (history) though, is the FACT that the ONLY French Air Unit to evacuate to the UK from Europe was one of the Polish manned Units within the French AF.
Those maned by Frenchmen, What became of those Units ?
- What makes you think that French AF units had a duty to fly to England? You're crazy. England and France were beaten, the French territory was being invaded but they still were FRENCH soldiers and they OBEYED ORDERS. The orders - obviously you have no idea - were that all French aircraft (and of course their crews) which were able to do so, and had the range, fly to French North Africa. This order was executed. All French airmen AND THEIR GOVERNMENT were firmly convinced that the fighting would continue from North Africa, where they had got enough airfields and facilities. But on 17 June IIRC Pétain came to power and reversed everything : he wanted the fighting to cease. Many generals, ministers and other politicians implored him to go to N. Africa and lead the war and the resistance to Nazi Germany but he refused. So what happened then could really not be foreseen by ordinary soldiers or officers : they all believed the fighting was going on and they were annihilated (and demoralized, for the first time) when they learned Pétain's decision.
Besides, ALL Polish reports, books etc. show that all French people, officers etc. did all they could to help the Poles to reach England. Many Poles escaped to England simply by ships sailing from French harbours. The French government could have made this escape really difficult. I'm glad they did not.
They joined the enemy and turned on their one time allies .
- Who joined the enemy, please? Could you explain? WHO turned on their allies?
Who were Traitors ?
- The Britishers, who cowardly murdered 1,300 good French navy seamen in their ships moored in harbour! In order to commit this slaughter they used their heaviest naval calibres, which proves that they wanted to KILL the French not only to disable the ships.
To those who don't know this detail I'd like to add that bigger ships, perhaps from destroyers upwards (cruisers, battleships...), need SEVERAL HOURS in order to start their engines and be able to sail and possibly fight. So the French ships at Mers el-Kébir had no chance. They could not even fire their guns.
Certain people these days try with great litterary fervour and long arguement to twist the facts .
- Yes, the British scoundrels do that. What I want is to expose the facts. I want everybody to know what really happened, to KNOW THE FACTS!
To what end ?
Why do they wish to change history ?
- Quite on the contrary : personally I want to save history - the truth quite simply.
|
Everybody knows what happened after the Japanese attacked the US base at Pearl Harbor, an attack very similar to the one at Mers el-Kébir : OF COURSE the USA immediately declared war on Japan. The whole world understood this perfectly well and agreed. Every American serviceman fought with the greatest tenacity to retaliate and make "the yellow monkeys" pay for their treacherous aggression.
The situation in Mers el-Kébir and Pearl Harbor was exactly the same with an exception though : everybody knew in advance that Japan was a potential enemy and would be a real one soon. So Japan was the enemy. But England was France's friend and ally!
SOME ally! This is nothing new, this is the way England always behaved and always will behave. Just look how they treated the Scots, then the Irish ("cattle", they use to say). Just look at the European Union : they always tried to destroy it and now they're close to succeed in it. What is the only important country in the EU which could join the Euro currency but refuses to do so? England of course, as usual! Our "ally"! SOME ally! Even the Germans gave up their wonderful, beloved, legendary and so strong Deutsche Mark, which sounded nearly impossible.
If France had declared war on the UK after MeK everybody in the world would perfectly have understood and the first effect would have been that dozens of very modern, very fast, heavily armed French naval ships and 60 submarines - with German approval and help, for ex. to get part of their equipment and armament which was left in France - would have cut off the North Atlantic route, starving Britain, which would have been compelled to surrender too. Not to mention that the participation of the French Air Force in the Battle of Britain with 1,000 fighters and 700 modern bombers would have finished the RAF and England. The new French fighters of August 1940 would have been the very best in the world : Dewoitine D.520, 523, 524 (ever more power and speed), D.551, Arsenal VG-33, 36, 39, etc. French bombers were armed with the same superlative cannon as the fighters...
Mers el-Kébir, a day which will live in infamy! Once more England stabbed her friend IN THE BACK like a yellow-bellied coward.
Of course I am glad that all this (France fighting the UK) did NOT happen for
Germany was EVEN WORSE than England, which does not make England likeable. Nevertheless Churchill (they say that HE ALONE insisted on the incredible brother murder of MeK) took a very high risk. He simply took the risk to lose the war within two months. And what for? To neutralise the 8 % of the French fleet which were at MeK! Most ships were at many other places. The clumsy Royal Navy did not even succeed in destroying all capital ships for the battleship "Strasbourg" made good her escape under heavy British fire (!) from the biggest British naval guns.
If France had accepted ANY of the British "proposals" (it was a disgusting ultimatum which no country in the world would have accepted) it would have been a breach of the German-French armistice (all French ships were to return to their ordinary harbours) and German reprisals could have been awful. Pétain was too scared - for his country - to take such a risk. The British ultimatum was totally unacceptable anyway. No country has the right to tell another country what to do with its own naval ships. English people think that they quite naturally ought to rule the whole world ("Rule Britannia") but this is a ridiculous error. The world doesn't agree, remember that.
I can't elaborate on this but the French Navy later proved that it never would accept her ships to be seized by Germany or Italy (who were unable to use them anyway - for lack of skilled crews). This never happened, not even at Toulon when the German army invaded 1942.
To answer your question Alex Smart :
England turned on her ally, France, and murdered her soldiers - it was not the first and not the last time...
To be objective we should remember that both England and France had agreed that their would be no separate surrender of one of these countries. But then the French "PM", Paul Reynaud, who was a hawk and wanted to wage war all the way, was replaced by Pétain, who was quite the opposite. Pétain did not respect his country's previous agreements but he felt there was nothing else he could do (this was totally wrong : I am a firm supporter of the continuation of the war by France). This certainly was the biggest mistake in his life.
Nevertheless Pétain - who alledgedly was a real German-hater - never joined Germany on her war against England in spite of his disgraceful "collaboration". For this we all, especially England, should be grateful. Of course almost the whole French population was pro-British and strongly anti-German at the time but, with corresponding propaganda, Mers el-Kébir could have reversed the signs.
Pétain's worst 1940 crime is never mentioned. In the armistice negotiations he accepted that France sent back to Germany "foreigners" who had fled to France, mainly from Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia, mainly Jews and political opponents. This was an absolutely terrible crime which NEVER can be forgiven. These people had trusted France to save their lives and their children's and Pétain handed them over to the Germans! No comment.