Quand tu perds une jambe à chaud par un boulet de canon et que tu vois ton compagnon avec qui tu étais ami se faire exploser par un canon avec tous ses boyaux qui ressort je n’appelle pas ça reposez en paix … n’oubliez jamais les soldats français sous Napoléon étaient objectivement très nombreux mais ont objectivement beaucoup souffert quand ils sont morts , la Guerre Napoléonienne de 1802-1815 elle était sale , très sale ne l’oubliez jamais , après comme on dit une guerre propre ça n’existe pas
Je vois que nous Français sommes traités plus bas que terre. Aux ignorants: lors de la bataille de 1940, l'armée s'est battue au delà de tout espoir et l'armée de l'air a sérieusement étrillé la Luftwaffe ce qui aura des conséquences lors de la bataille d'Angleterre. Lisez des livres ...
***** Y'a un truck que je sais, c'est que les français ne doivent rien (ou peu) au américain, dans les deux guerre mondiale si ils ont déclaré la guerre c'est qu'ils avait pas le choix, pas par bonté, sinon ils serait venu dé le début. Pour les anglais, ils ont rien a dire non plus car il leur a fallu au moin 5 coalition pour battre Napoléon, et ils était pas la dans la majeur partie des batailles
Before this Le Grande Armee i would say the army of Louis XIV in the late 17th century was probably one of the strongest in history even though it didn't achieve as much as Napoleon's army. Post-Napoleonic war France still had the strongest army in Europe and wasn't replaced until 1871 by the Prussians/German Empire.
everyone know wellington he's oje of the greatest british commander in history he deserve his respect and he was the only won in the world napeolon had viewed as a threat but not his equal Napoelon is a emperor
@@LMarc-ev6fm they're both popular Wellington is one of the most famous and msot respected british commander but admiral Nelson is still the heart and the best british commander
@wilhelm1908 Smaller nations? In the Napoleonic wars (The French won five wars druring the 1792-1809) they were fighting against entire Europe (Or against kings of Europe), battle of Austerlitz is one of the best examples of Napoleons ability to win battles with minimal men losses. But i was not talking only about Napoleonic wars, the French army really has the best record in Europe.
don't forget that wellington troop were in majority germans one (KGL, brunswick, Nassau, hanovrians (more than 33000 men ) . the Prussians made a great tactical move after the defeat of Ligny, they managed to retreat and return to the fight with 30 000 foe on their rear searching them
Whether the troops were German, English, Scottish or Irish, those in the British Army were "British troops" in terms of the army they enlisted in, the government they served and the cause they fought and died for. There was no Germany as we know it, just a new German Confederation. The Prussians made no tactical withdrawal from Ligny, they retreated, lost 20,000 men and ~8,000 deserters and had to rally. That defeat made Quatre Bras impossible to hold, so Wellington made a real tactical retreat.
and yet americans say french are cowards, i agree with you 100% and im half english myself. the french still have an army that should be feared to this day, and fought off the germans well in both world wars, this stereotype of cowardice is very ironic indeed
Well, the term "thin red line" actually applies to the Battle of Balaclava during the Crimean War, 40 years later. The British Army in the Peninsular War and at Waterloo was always multi-national, but then the UK was in all 7 coalitions, paid most of its allies for their support, trained and supplied a lot of them, and was perhaps France's greatest enemy throughout the entire Napoleonic War and years before that, but was unreachable due to its formidable Royal Navy protecting its secure island.
Ok, I assume many of the people here have read the sharpe series. When he talks of the pas de charge being played in the massive French Columns is he speaking of this pas de charge?
2 theories. a) Redcoats are not easily defeated, even when facing large numbers and were in a good defensive position that the French would have trouble pressing, even with a strong advance, reverse slopes provide good cover. b) If the French had charged the centre, the British line might have closed in around them, flanking their advancing lines. Like what happened during Pickett's Charge, Gettysburg, American Civil War. Unlike Austerlitz, Redcoats are less likely to break than Austrians.
La Haye Sainte was a forward-position 250m forward of Wellington's main line, it is impossible to claim that "the center was open" when in fact La Haye Sainte was an outlying position, detached from the center, which Wellington piled his reserves into once La Haye Sainte fell, meaning fresher troops were placed atop the ridge, that tired French troops may not have been able to defeat, even if the Prussians had not prevented them from advancing. Claiming victory for either side is a biased guess.
On totaly war, I had 2 150 unit battalions of Old Guard, and they sent the whole Prussian army running, and the remaining British forces, I can just imagine the morale and loyalty those troops had, or else they would not have made them THAT skilled in game, amazing,
i don't read his book, that's why i suppose he wrote that because the german's soldiers were the largest force in waterloo. But maybe he don't accept the british propaganda (made by wellington ) against hollando,belgium and german force that had made the british soldier as the only winner of the battle. Waterloo was not a thin red line but a green, black, blue and red line, that's the truth
the prince of orange is seen as a hero in netherland, look at the monument constructed for him on the waterloo battlefield: the "lion's mound". but as you already said he was young and had been totaly inexperienced. a battle could be win, or lost , on a single action the allied line were very long, if the french had took and held the bruxelle road, no doubt that wellington should had retreat if Prussians hadn't come, but it is a what if.
sure but i only said that because peter hofschroer wrote that it was a german victory because the german's troop where the biggest part of the allied forces in Waterloo, if you had the Prussians, you have 80 000 germans who fought on the battlefield and 50 000 more waiting to launch the pursuit
it is not the haie sainte in itself but the possibiliy for the french ( and they started to do that) to put some gun to support an attack on the center. But the men for this attack were at plancenoit fighing the prussians. all witness of the battle confirm that the allied army was in critical position when french took the center of the battlefield at the haie sainte. But for the french the winning condition disapeared because they had no reserve only the guard
The Lion's Mount is hideous. As Wellington said, "They have ruined my battlefield!" I agree.. it isn't a monument, it's a mess which disfigured the landscape.
well to be fair without chruchil the battle of Briton would have been lost. Despite sonar and an island advantage. The people need a leader during wartimes. Churchil fit the role and gave the people the fortitude to stand and fight where as anyone else would have surrendered
Good post. If Britain was connected to continental Europe it would have had, in the past, a large standing army. In 1800 France had aprox 5 times as many people as Britain, even with a large standing army (at that time) we could not have competed with France's Grande army. Same in 1940 with Germany. We play to our strengths, and that is if you live on an island you need a strong navy.
The first universal male suffrage occured in 1793 in France and for the women in 1944, while all suffrage restrictions were abolished in the UK only in 1948.
sure the red coat are good in defensive position but autrian troop too Napoleon alaways said to people who said that austrian soldier broke easily : you weren't been in Wagram. at the moment of the fall of the haie sainte, the allied troop in front of the french were not numerous, the KGL and hanovrians units had been crushed and wellington didn't have any british troop available for an immediate defense,only brunswick troop he said to the Capt shaw to use any german unit that he could.
Dude you're wrong. French troops at that time were mostly fresh and unexperimented levy, since "la Grande Armée" was left bloodless after the retreat of Russia/Prussia. Furthermore, the French were clearly outnumbered, and they would certainly won if the Prussians didn't arrive to save the day. Don't wanna patronize you but you should read about Waterloo from other sources than most of the complacent british ones.
They weren't new. The army du nord of Napoleon was a well trained and equipped army, and with the presence of the imperial guard who were all the way back in the old days of Italy boosters their morale.
i'm agree when you say he failed to decisively defeat Russia, but not for the reasons you invoke, but because of an enemy who knows his weaknesses, it's not me but Kutuzov who said that, it's why he made the choice to retreat all the time and because Alexander "who was a French admirer", always refused negotiations. Yes French's army was multinational because of the French conquest in Europe, and nearly 300 000 were French, biggest army of history at that time Most impressive army of the Era
@@nataturoiii5231 c'est je crois l'un des seuls régiments de ligne a étre resté au cotés de la garde jusqu'au bout à waterloo sans fuir et ils sont quasi tous mort pour cela
The English have especially a "willingness to fight" in France . They fled so rapidly that they left all their military equipment on the beaches and it's the French who had not "a willingness to fight " as you said who covered the English glorious retreat .
we were all a team, a team fighting bony and we won we all shared the glory,yes it was the prussians that saved us at waterloo and we saved them by making that stand, russia was invaded we helped free them. you hid away during the first world war, then when Jerry surrenders you come out of your holes with all the glory like you won the day! We won many victories over France we even wasted blood trying too save France
Absolutly but i was said in 1940 we need more RAF piltote and planes but Churchill dont care. The blitz is 3 army type in same time: Lot of planes, lot of inf, lot of tanks. The B1bis french tank can easy hold vs PZ1, 2,3 and 4, soldiers UK and Fr can figth too, (even if french leader general was poor) but the mistake of Churchill was to not send and build more plane for the begining of war.
The Mahratas and Mugals ruled almost all of india and they were trained by french officers. France was ocupied in WW2 that had never been seen before, and Napoleon's soldier obeyed his orders without his mind they wouldn't have done any of what they did.
74,000 French with 250 cannon. 23,000 British & 44,000 Allies (= 67,000) with 150 cannon. Most of the allied troops were inexperienced and some ran away. Waterloo was lost by Napolean and Ney and then the French ran.
Old Duffer your numbers are wrong sir and the army's were the same size and yes the British troops were inexperienced so was half of the French army after 1812 most of the veterans dead and new recruits and conscripts were in the French army and the Prussians save the English cowards that sat on their ass on the hill and were almost beaten by the French and the Prussians had about the same numbers as the French and British so no telling lies
The English did not fight in France for the French, but to protect their interest as they have always done in history. The English did not want a powerful Germany. They did the same thing during the French revolution wars .
Peter Hofschröer is right that the Prussians were necessary to secure victory and that their arrival was timely and well placed to help divert Napoleon's forces from advancing on the British lines. However, he places all the emphasis on the "Germans" as being the sole victors, gives little credit with regards how long the British actually held for, that there position was tenable, that they held against various infantry and cavalry attacks. Hofschröer is simply ignorant of the word "allies".
1) Smolensk August 16-18,1812? it was a French victory Valutina is a small French victory and a succesfull Russian retreat Mohilev,not a defeat and french army were outnumbered Shevardino?it's a part of the Battle of Borodino who is a French tactical victory and the opening road to Moscow You are right on a point, Russia was too vast and distant for a total victory in the case of a flight of the Russian army who refused the negotiations and it was the case after Smolensk,Borodino, and Moscow.
Just one thing in Waterloo, Wellington would have been fucked without the help of his Prussians led by Gebhard von Blücher, Napoleon saw troops coming at his flanks he thought it was his Marshall Crouchy, but it was Blücher and so Napoleon had to concentrate against two enemies. Please, before you say something about history get your facts right.
Of course a large population is a good factor for an army,(just see Russia of ww2), Power of France in the Napoleon's Era is not only a question of population, Just see Russia who is the main actor against France of this period, had a larger population than France but were beaten with the other allies, like in Austerlitz. France army of 1815 was just the shadow of the 2 Grande Armée of 1805 and 1812. For this Era France had definitely the most impressive army but finaly lost out of breath
I can say exactly the same for France, contrbution to the world for culture, art, architecture,history,etc...., and to England, for example : don't forget your royal mottos : Dieu et mon Droit, honni soit qui mal y pense, etc.. You see it's funny too!
In 1940 if France will have the real support of RAF, the german blitz can be stoped. The stuka was decisive in the north invasion, and the french air force was good but fight at 1 vs 10. And dunkerque was an infamy.
First of all, numerous divisions fought the Italians in the south of France and defeated them . Secondly at the end of june the French troops were under the French government who was unfortunately the Vichy government who chooses to become the poodles of the Germans .
no revisionism just fact ! the prussians forced the french to fought on their right side. those men of the right (young guard and 6eme corps) could be redirect toward the center when the haie sainte felt the british center was open and those men would had finished the day for the french. Don't forget that prussian force present at waterloo were numbered 44544 men and they fought from 16h30 until the battle ended forcing the french to held a great part of their troop to stop them
I said Britain never conquered (not fought) a civilised nation. I said Britain never fought without allies (in the 7YW, Prussia did the job for you). I said Britain never had mighty generals and you give me generals which won only 5 battles... There's much more glory in fighting the entire Europe alone like did the French so many times, than attacking one country when you have Europe behind you. French soldiers were feared in Europe, British are just remembered as natives slaughterers.
At the Bir Hakeim battle the french légion (3 723 soldiers and poor artillerie + some RAF planes) hold the field versus 43000 germans and italian with tanks, planes and artillerie. The french foreign légion save your 8th british army...........ok ^^
+MateuseVIII These generals are famous but aren't good , the good ones were Washington and John Churchill. We can just add Nelson if we include admirals
+TNCMAD Hum, not washington (I don't know if Churchill was the one who planned the military operation so I can't judge^^). I mean, Washington lost nearly all the major battle =)
MrPainwind Yah Washington was a bad tactician and he could only rely on milicia. Even when he was in the Royal Army during the 7 years war he was bad. But he was charismatic, that's what made him a good general. Plus, are you talking of Churchill the general or the prime minister? Because i'm talking of John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough, the ancestor of Winston Churchill, the prime minister of GB after Chamberlain.
MrPainwind No problem, had also the same issue with the Churchill family. But after all, England and then, GB have never had great generals. They had good ones but not great ones, even Montgomery was "just" good and not great compared to the mythic Frederick II of Prussia, Napoleon, Louis XIV, or even Rommel and Robert Lee.
Honneur à tous les braves soldats français tués lors de la bataille de Waterloo, puissent-ils reposez en paix au firmament.
Honneur à tous les soldats morts à Waterloo, quelles que furent leurs nationalités ! ;) surtout à l'époque....
@@bouroumeaunicolas1896 Nan pas les britaniques et les prussiens certainement pas !
@@supracsgo5040 ils se sont battu comme les soldats français
Ils méritent les honneur
Tous tombés au champ d honneur
Quand tu perds une jambe à chaud par un boulet de canon et que tu vois ton compagnon avec qui tu étais ami se faire exploser par un canon avec tous ses boyaux qui ressort je n’appelle pas ça reposez en paix … n’oubliez jamais les soldats français sous Napoléon étaient objectivement très nombreux mais ont objectivement beaucoup souffert quand ils sont morts , la Guerre Napoléonienne de 1802-1815 elle était sale , très sale ne l’oubliez jamais , après comme on dit une guerre propre ça n’existe pas
Je vois que nous Français sommes traités plus bas que terre. Aux ignorants: lors de la bataille de 1940, l'armée s'est battue au delà de tout espoir et l'armée de l'air a sérieusement étrillé la Luftwaffe ce qui aura des conséquences lors de la bataille d'Angleterre. Lisez des livres ...
Surtout à la battaille de Dunkerque :)
DeepCoverAka187 Merci et honneur aux troupes héroïques du général Molinié.
***** Y'a un truck que je sais, c'est que les français ne doivent rien (ou peu) au américain, dans les deux guerre mondiale si ils ont déclaré la guerre c'est qu'ils avait pas le choix, pas par bonté, sinon ils serait venu dé le début. Pour les anglais, ils ont rien a dire non plus car il leur a fallu au moin 5 coalition pour battre Napoléon, et ils était pas la dans la majeur partie des batailles
***** Bien d'accord avec vous. A part ça, je trouve votre première phrase bien vue et plutôt marrante. Bonne journée.
camaro89886
et puis l'escadrille normandie niemen ont dessoudé beaucoup de chasseurs allemands en Russie
awesome!!! the french grenadiers are my favorite soldiers!!! VIVE LA VIEILLE GARDE!!!
Gloire à l'Empire Français! Gloire à L'EMPEREUR!
mais des millions de morts disparus blessés pour tous pays!
5 mai 2021, 200ans depuis sa disparition! Tous aux Invalides! Vive l'Empereur, vive l'Empire!
Vive l'Empereur !
Longue vie à l'Empereur !
Very impressive and very imperial march. Greetings from Greece.
Vive la garde impériale , j ' en ai la chair de poule , quels combattants
Gloire a la France éternelle et a son éternel Empereur !
En ce temps la le mot France voulait dire quelque chose honneurs a tous les braves vive la france
MEEEEEERDE !!!! LA GARDE MEURT MAIS NE SE REND PAS
Le Colonel Michel qui aurait lancé cette célébrité ( Peut-être?)
Such an extraordinary piece of music. Just awe inspiring, as if demanding to be heard.
Before this Le Grande Armee i would say the army of Louis XIV in the late 17th century was probably one of the strongest in history even though it didn't achieve as much as Napoleon's army.
Post-Napoleonic war France still had the strongest army in Europe and wasn't replaced until 1871 by the Prussians/German Empire.
So this is the march that the Garde played in the real battle but in the movie it played La Victoire est a Nous. Such a difference
La Garde Meurt Mais Ne Se Rend Pas !!!
Vive L'Empereur !!!
At the end of the day, the all world know Napoleon, no one know Wellington!!
yay!
Erm we know both here in the UK.
@@danielbarrett5464 I think Nelson is more popular than Wellington, worldwide in mean
everyone know wellington
he's oje of the greatest british commander in history
he deserve his respect and he was the only won in the world
napeolon had viewed as a threat
but not his equal
Napoelon is a emperor
@@LMarc-ev6fm they're both popular
Wellington is one of the most famous and msot respected british commander
but admiral Nelson is still the heart and the best british commander
Je crois bien que c'est juste " La Marche de la Garde " Et qu'en faite le " Waterloo" n'est là que pour illustrer la musique :D
Yes
Merci pour le marche du (Waterloo)
" pas un homme ne manqua au suicide , le soldat etait aussi héros que le génèral ...." V.Hugo
@wilhelm1908 Smaller nations? In the Napoleonic wars (The French won five wars druring the 1792-1809) they were fighting against entire Europe (Or against kings of Europe), battle of Austerlitz is one of the best examples of Napoleons ability to win battles with minimal men losses.
But i was not talking only about Napoleonic wars, the French army really has the best record in Europe.
not only in europe in the entire world 133 war victory for 33 looses
Un moment y a eu un nombre de figurant incroyable!!
Voila un vrai camarade!
totaly agree
don't forget that wellington troop were in majority germans one (KGL, brunswick, Nassau, hanovrians (more than 33000 men ) . the Prussians made a great tactical move after the defeat of Ligny, they managed to retreat and return to the fight with 30 000 foe on their rear searching them
Whether the troops were German, English, Scottish or Irish, those in the British Army were "British troops" in terms of the army they enlisted in, the government they served and the cause they fought and died for. There was no Germany as we know it, just a new German Confederation. The Prussians made no tactical withdrawal from Ligny, they retreated, lost 20,000 men and ~8,000 deserters and had to rally. That defeat made Quatre Bras impossible to hold, so Wellington made a real tactical retreat.
The 100 years war is not a war based on country but a family war, it is not simply a France/England war, it is much more complicated ..
and yet americans say french are cowards, i agree with you 100% and im half english myself. the french still have an army that should be feared to this day, and fought off the germans well in both world wars, this stereotype of cowardice is very ironic indeed
Well, the term "thin red line" actually applies to the Battle of Balaclava during the Crimean War, 40 years later. The British Army in the Peninsular War and at Waterloo was always multi-national, but then the UK was in all 7 coalitions, paid most of its allies for their support, trained and supplied a lot of them, and was perhaps France's greatest enemy throughout the entire Napoleonic War and years before that, but was unreachable due to its formidable Royal Navy protecting its secure island.
vive l'empereur
Ok, I assume many of the people here have read the sharpe series. When he talks of the pas de charge being played in the massive French Columns is he speaking of this pas de charge?
I don't speak about Normandie . I speak about the day after Dunkirk when the French returned in France to fight .
Nice music
Vive l'Empereur et la grandeur de la France
Oh sorry, my mistake. Its was the French that ran up the white flag again. Not the British.
Why did they have to stay back at Waterloo sad they should have won they where Brave
2 theories. a) Redcoats are not easily defeated, even when facing large numbers and were in a good defensive position that the French would have trouble pressing, even with a strong advance, reverse slopes provide good cover. b) If the French had charged the centre, the British line might have closed in around them, flanking their advancing lines. Like what happened during Pickett's Charge, Gettysburg, American Civil War. Unlike Austerlitz, Redcoats are less likely to break than Austrians.
La Haye Sainte was a forward-position 250m forward of Wellington's main line, it is impossible to claim that "the center was open" when in fact La Haye Sainte was an outlying position, detached from the center, which Wellington piled his reserves into once La Haye Sainte fell, meaning fresher troops were placed atop the ridge, that tired French troops may not have been able to defeat, even if the Prussians had not prevented them from advancing. Claiming victory for either side is a biased guess.
On totaly war, I had 2 150 unit battalions of Old Guard, and they sent the whole Prussian army running, and the remaining British forces, I can just imagine the morale and loyalty those troops had, or else they would not have made them THAT skilled in game, amazing,
i don't read his book, that's why i suppose he wrote that because the german's soldiers were the largest force in waterloo. But maybe he don't accept the british propaganda (made by wellington ) against hollando,belgium and german force that had made the british soldier as the only winner of the battle. Waterloo was not a thin red line but a green, black, blue and red line, that's the truth
La Garde, lambs to to slaughter when they met the British 1st Foot Guards. "now Maitland, nows your time".
the prince of orange is seen as a hero in netherland, look at the monument constructed for him on the waterloo battlefield: the "lion's mound". but as you already said he was young and had been totaly inexperienced. a battle could be win, or lost , on a single action the allied line were very long, if the french had took and held the bruxelle road, no doubt that wellington should had retreat if Prussians hadn't come, but it is a what if.
sure but i only said that because peter hofschroer wrote that it was a german victory because the german's troop where the biggest part of the allied forces in Waterloo, if you had the Prussians, you have 80 000 germans who fought on the battlefield and 50 000 more waiting to launch the pursuit
Force et honneur
it is not the haie sainte in itself but the possibiliy for the french ( and they started to do that) to put some gun to support an attack on the center. But the men for this attack were at plancenoit fighing the prussians. all witness of the battle confirm that the allied army was in critical position when french took the center of the battlefield at the haie sainte. But for the french the winning condition disapeared because they had no reserve only the guard
Grande Napoleone, se Ney fosse arrivato in tempo, la più grande vittoria
Vive la France!
The song of death, march on comrades.
Nous sommes alliés et nous avons vaincus tous ensembles !
@dawka4445 Yes, but it is a history of victories
Viv la garde et im British 🇬🇧🇫🇷
The Lion's Mount is hideous. As Wellington said, "They have ruined my battlefield!" I agree.. it isn't a monument, it's a mess which disfigured the landscape.
well to be fair without chruchil the battle of Briton would have been lost. Despite sonar and an island advantage. The people need a leader during wartimes. Churchil fit the role and gave the people the fortitude to stand and fight where as anyone else would have surrendered
Good post. If Britain was connected to continental Europe it would have had, in the past, a large standing army. In 1800 France had aprox 5 times as many people as Britain, even with a large standing army (at that time) we could not have competed with France's Grande army. Same in 1940 with Germany. We play to our strengths, and that is if you live on an island you need a strong navy.
VIVE LA FRANCE AAAAAAAAAH
The first universal male suffrage occured in 1793 in France and for the women in 1944, while all suffrage restrictions were abolished in the UK only in 1948.
Vive Napoléon !!! Vive la France !!! Vive L Empereur !!!
sure the red coat are good in defensive position but autrian troop too Napoleon alaways said to people who said that austrian soldier broke easily : you weren't been in Wagram. at the moment of the fall of the haie sainte, the allied troop in front of the french were not numerous, the KGL and hanovrians units had been crushed and wellington didn't have any british troop available for an immediate defense,only brunswick troop he said to the Capt shaw to use any german unit that he could.
OMG ! It's the first time that a Brit said to me that the French lost a battle but not the war . Sorry I'm not used to that I must take a break .
Dude you're wrong. French troops at that time were mostly fresh and unexperimented levy, since "la Grande Armée" was left bloodless after the retreat of Russia/Prussia. Furthermore, the French were clearly outnumbered, and they would certainly won if the Prussians didn't arrive to save the day. Don't wanna patronize you but you should read about Waterloo from other sources than most of the complacent british ones.
They weren't new. The army du nord of Napoleon was a well trained and equipped army, and with the presence of the imperial guard who were all the way back in the old days of Italy boosters their morale.
Vive notre petit caporal,que l aigle revienne pour la gloire de .otre Patrie
i'm agree when you say he failed to decisively defeat Russia, but not for the reasons you invoke, but because of an enemy who knows his weaknesses, it's not me but Kutuzov who said that, it's why he made the choice to retreat all the time and because Alexander "who was a French admirer", always refused negotiations.
Yes French's army was multinational because of the French conquest in Europe, and nearly 300 000 were French, biggest army of history at that time
Most impressive army of the Era
VIVE LEMPEREUR ET VIVE LE 14 EME DE LIGNE
Pourquoi le 14 eme
@@nataturoiii5231 c'est je crois l'un des seuls régiments de ligne a étre resté au cotés de la garde jusqu'au bout à waterloo sans fuir et ils sont quasi tous mort pour cela
The English have especially a "willingness to fight" in France . They fled so rapidly that they left all their military equipment on the beaches and it's the French who had not "a willingness to fight " as you said who covered the English glorious retreat .
we were all a team, a team fighting bony and we won we all shared the glory,yes it was the prussians that saved us at waterloo and we saved them by making that stand, russia was invaded we helped free them.
you hid away during the first world war, then when Jerry surrenders you come out of your holes with all the glory like you won the day!
We won many victories over France we even wasted blood trying too save France
Absolutly but i was said in 1940 we need more RAF piltote and planes but Churchill dont care. The blitz is 3 army type in same time: Lot of planes, lot of inf, lot of tanks. The B1bis french tank can easy hold vs PZ1, 2,3 and 4, soldiers UK and Fr can figth too, (even if french leader general was poor) but the mistake of Churchill was to not send and build more plane for the begining of war.
Vive le grand Empereur!
The Mahratas and Mugals ruled almost all of india and they were trained by french officers. France was ocupied in WW2 that had never been seen before, and Napoleon's soldier obeyed his orders without his mind they wouldn't have done any of what they did.
On a french subject in a french vidéo ?
Марш неплохой, на мой вкус не хватает литавр для большей жесткости.
J'adore les français!
Waterloo
Can anyone tell me what movie is this?? Thanks !
Waterloo 1970
74,000 French with 250 cannon. 23,000 British & 44,000 Allies (= 67,000) with 150 cannon. Most of the allied troops were inexperienced and some ran away. Waterloo was lost by Napolean and Ney and then the French ran.
Old Duffer your numbers are wrong sir and the army's were the same size and yes the British troops were inexperienced so was half of the French army after 1812 most of the veterans dead and new recruits and conscripts were in the French army and the Prussians save the English cowards that sat on their ass on the hill and were almost beaten by the French and the Prussians had about the same numbers as the French and British so no telling lies
The English did not fight in France for the French, but to protect their interest as they have always done in history. The English did not want a powerful Germany. They did the same thing during the French revolution wars .
Vive la France
Blood and Iron
No Jeff. I just got carried away with some of the extreme comments on this page. Thought Guilliam le conquerant was back for a minute. Remember him?
Waterloo (1970)
Do you really want a quarrel with me ?
Peter Hofschröer is right that the Prussians were necessary to secure victory and that their arrival was timely and well placed to help divert Napoleon's forces from advancing on the British lines. However, he places all the emphasis on the "Germans" as being the sole victors, gives little credit with regards how long the British actually held for, that there position was tenable, that they held against various infantry and cavalry attacks. Hofschröer is simply ignorant of the word "allies".
Quand vs aurez apris déjà l'histoire de France par coeur on pourra parler. ;-)
1)
Smolensk August 16-18,1812? it was a French victory
Valutina is a small French victory and a succesfull Russian retreat
Mohilev,not a defeat and french army were outnumbered
Shevardino?it's a part of the Battle of Borodino who is a French tactical victory and the opening road to Moscow
You are right on a point, Russia was too vast and distant for a total victory in the case of a flight of the Russian army who refused the negotiations and it was the case after Smolensk,Borodino, and Moscow.
No, he means the Toulon where Napoleon had his first command and bombarded the RN from high ground forcing a withdrawal. During revolutionary wars.
Just one thing in Waterloo, Wellington would have been fucked without the help of his Prussians led by Gebhard von Blücher, Napoleon saw troops coming at his flanks he thought it was his Marshall Crouchy, but it was Blücher and so Napoleon had to concentrate against two enemies.
Please, before you say something about history get your facts right.
their*
No cavalry?
c koi le nom du film
krostine62 Waterloo
@wilhelm1908 But still the french army has won more battles than the british.
Of course a large population is a good factor for an army,(just see Russia of ww2), Power of France in the Napoleon's Era is not only a question of population,
Just see Russia who is the main actor against France of this period, had a larger population than France but were beaten with the other allies, like in Austerlitz.
France army of 1815 was just the shadow of the 2 Grande Armée of 1805 and 1812.
For this Era France had definitely the most impressive army but finaly lost out of breath
I can say exactly the same for France, contrbution to the world for culture, art, architecture,history,etc...., and to England, for example : don't forget your royal mottos : Dieu et mon Droit, honni soit qui mal y pense, etc..
You see it's funny too!
vive l Ampleur ( des dégats)
In 1940 if France will have the real support of RAF, the german blitz can be stoped. The stuka was decisive in the north invasion, and the french air force was good but fight at 1 vs 10.
And dunkerque was an infamy.
nope, i did!
First of all, numerous divisions fought the Italians in the south of France and defeated them . Secondly at the end of june the French troops were under the French government who was unfortunately the Vichy government who chooses to become the poodles of the Germans .
no revisionism just fact !
the prussians forced the french to fought on their right side. those men of the right (young guard and 6eme corps) could be redirect toward the center when the haie sainte felt the british center was open and those men would had finished the day for the french. Don't forget that prussian force present at waterloo were numbered 44544 men and they fought from 16h30 until the battle ended forcing the french to held a great part of their troop to stop them
I said Britain never conquered (not fought) a civilised nation. I said Britain never fought without allies (in the 7YW, Prussia did the job for you). I said Britain never had mighty generals and you give me generals which won only 5 battles... There's much more glory in fighting the entire Europe alone like did the French so many times, than attacking one country when you have Europe behind you. French soldiers were feared in Europe, British are just remembered as natives slaughterers.
He bien si Napoleon revenait il n en croirait pas ses yeux de voir sa France dans l état ou elle se trouve
Vive la France
Vive Napoleon!
At the Bir Hakeim battle the french légion (3 723 soldiers and poor artillerie + some RAF planes) hold the field versus 43000 germans and italian with tanks, planes and artillerie. The french foreign légion save your 8th british army...........ok ^^
+MateuseVIII
These generals are famous but aren't good , the good ones were Washington and John Churchill. We can just add Nelson if we include admirals
+TNCMAD Hum, not washington (I don't know if Churchill was the one who planned the military operation so I can't judge^^). I mean, Washington lost nearly all the major battle =)
MrPainwind
Yah Washington was a bad tactician and he could only rely on milicia.
Even when he was in the Royal Army during the 7 years war he was bad.
But he was charismatic, that's what made him a good general.
Plus, are you talking of Churchill the general or the prime minister? Because i'm talking of John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough, the ancestor of Winston Churchill, the prime minister of GB after Chamberlain.
TNCMAD ok, I admit, I didn't know that there was two churchill >
MrPainwind
No problem, had also the same issue with the Churchill family.
But after all, England and then, GB have never had great generals. They had good ones but not great ones, even Montgomery was "just" good and not great compared to the mythic Frederick II of Prussia, Napoleon, Louis XIV, or even Rommel and Robert Lee.