Military Review

The last paladin

55
With the departure of de Gaulle, both France and Europe were completely dependent on the US


If France had not de Gaulle, it would have passed into the category of secondary European powers already in 1940. But only if the charisma and indomitable will allowed this man to become the last paladin of the former Europe?

Quietly forgotten история with the Mistrals, it became a watershed. It did not so much change the relations of Russia and France at the military-technical cooperation level, as it turned the invisible page of the Fifth Republic, because from now on it wouldn’t turn the language to call its citizens the descendants of the harsh Clovis, the selfless Joan of Arc or the fearless d'Artagnan. Before us is a new formation associating itself with the magazine Charlie Hebdo, which specializes in the humiliation of other shrines.

If we recall the terminology of Lev Gumilyov, then, undoubtedly, the French are now in a state of obscuration, that is, a deep ethnic old age. At the same time, they look like a very elderly person who, despite the whole bunch of age-related ailments, does not at all seek to give up bad habits. This is evidenced by the demographic policy of the country with the connivance of same-sex marriages and thereby the destruction of the main criterion of the vitality of the nation - a full-fledged Christian family, and the inability to curb the hordes of migrants flooding France.

Against the background of all these sad events concerning, in general, the Old World as a whole, the figure of the last paladin is united, a politician desperately and, as history has shown, unsuccessfully trying to reanimate the spiritually dying Motherland - brigadier General Charles de Gaulle.

His efforts to save the Old World and the prestige of his own country were truly heroic, it was not for nothing that Churchill called de Gaulle "the honor of France". To the general - by the way, he was never confirmed in this rank - the impossible was possible: not only to revive the country as a great power, but also to introduce it to the number of winners in the Second World War. Although she did not deserve this, having broken at the first and by no means catastrophic failures at the front. When American troops landed in the pro-fascist regime of Vichy in North Africa, they were surprised to find portraits of Marshal Petain’s traitor in France in most local houses and, in addition, faced resistance from Vichy troops. And during the war years, the French industry regularly worked for Germany.

Finally, according to the Soviet demographer Boris Urlanis, losses of the Resistance made 20 thousands of people out of 40 millions of people, and the French units fighting on the side of the Wehrmacht lost forty to fifty thousand killed, mainly in the ranks of the SS Charlemagne voluntary divisions. How not to recall the legend about the reaction of Field Marshal Keitel, who saw the French delegation at the signing of the act of the unconditional surrender of Germany: “How! We also lost the war by this? ” Even if the Hitlerite military leader did not say it out loud, then he certainly thought for sure. If anyone belonged to the fourth place among the victor countries, so whimsical, but heroic Poland or courageous Yugoslavia, but not France at all.

But the latter had de Gaulle, and the Poles did not have such a scale after the death of the Sikorsky figure. Tito did not have a place in Potsdam for many reasons, one of which, the two communist leaders, was too much for the leaders of the United States and Great Britain.

Personality formation


De Gaulle was born in 1890, twenty years after the defeat of Napoleon III's army by Prussian troops and the proclamation at Versailles - the palace of the French kings of the second Reich. The fear of a repeated German invasion was the nightmare of the inhabitants of the Third Republic. Let me remind you that in 1874 Bismarck wanted to finish off France and only the intervention of Alexander II saved her from final defeat. Distracted somewhat, I note: it will take another 40 years and Russia at the cost of the death of two of its armies in East Prussia will once again save France from inevitable defeat.

At the same time, in the last quarter of the 19th century, among the French military and intellectuals, there was a thirst for revenge. The de Gaulle family shared similar sentiments. The future president's father, Henri, who was wounded near Paris in 1870, told his son a lot about that unfortunate war. He was not a professional military man, but served France as a teacher of literature and philosophy at the Jesuit College. It served. And I gave my inner state to my son, who graduated from the same college where his father taught.

The last paladinThis is a very important detail on the life path of de Gaulle. For he received a good Christian upbringing and education, the foundation of which was the motto in the spirit of medieval Christian chivalry, to which, by the way, belonged to de Gaulle's family: "Tron, altar, saber and kropilo", in the future will make the general not just a supporter of creating a strong Europe , but without exaggeration the defender of Christian civilization and its values, forgotten by the modern leadership of the country.

It was with a saber in the hands of the young Charles decided to devote his earthly life to France, entering Saint-Cyr - an elite military school created by Napoleon, in which noblemen, who came from old knightly families and were brought up in the spirit of Christian piety and devotion to the Motherland, were trained.

Unofficially, Saint-Cyr was under the patronage of the Jesuits and was in a sense an island of old France. It is symbolic that the school was not destroyed by the Nazis, but by the American aviation: thus, deprived of the historical roots of the United States, willy-nilly destroyed Christian Europe.

Two years before the start of the First World War, de Gaulle was let out of school, beyond the gates of which he was met by far from the France he had dreamed of. At the beginning of the century, three thousand religious schools were closed, and the Church was separated from the state, which was a blow to the spiritual and moral education and education of the French. Blow targeted, because a number of prime ministers of the Third Republic - Gambetta, Ferri, Combe were masons. The consequences of their disastrous educational policies for the country, de Gaulle felt later years after becoming president.

But this is in the future, but for now the young captain found himself in the flames of the First World War, where he was waited for by three wounds, captured and six unsuccessful escapes, as well as the experience of war with the Bolsheviks as part of the Polish army, in whose ranks he could have made a brilliant career. Had this happened and — who knows — Poland might have avoided defeat in World War II.

This is not speculation, refuted by the undisputed "history does not tolerate the subjunctive mood." It's time to touch another face of de Gaulle's personality - his intuition. Back in college, the future general was fascinated by Bergson’s teaching, which placed intuition at the center of man’s existence, expressed for a politician in anticipation of future events. This was also characteristic of de Gaulle.

Feather and sword

Returning home after the Peace of Versailles, he understood: the lull for a while and the most prudent thing for France now is to prepare for a new, completely different war. About her in the Third Republic tried not to think at all. The French reliably, as it seemed to them, separated themselves from Germany with the Maginot Line and considered this to be sufficient.

It is not surprising that de Gaulle’s first book “Discord in the camp of the enemy”, published in 1924, remained unnoticed by either the military or politicians. Although it expounded the experience of a man who saw Germany from the inside. And in fact, the work of a young officer, then still, became the first step towards a close examination of the future enemy. It is important to note that de Gaulle appears here not only as a writer, but already as a politician.

Less than ten years later, his second book, already better known, “At the Edge of a Sword”, comes out. It shows de Gaulle's intuition. There is an opinion about the book of the English journalist Alexander Vert: "This essay reflects de Gaulle's unshakable faith in himself as in a man sent down by fate."

Then, in 1934, the work “For the Professional Army” came out, and four years later - “France and its army”. In all three books, de Gaulle writes about the need for the development of armored forces. However, this appeal remained a voice crying in the wilderness, the leaders of the country rejected his ideas as contrary to the logic of history. And here, oddly enough, they were right: history showed the military weakness of France, despite the power of its armament.

The point is not even in the government, but in the French themselves.

In this regard, the analogy with the characteristic once given by the German historian Johann Herder to the Byzantine society of the late antiquity is appropriate: “Here, of course, divinely inspired men — patriarchs, bishops, priests — delivered speeches, but to whom did they speak, what did they say? .. Before the insane, spoiled, unrestrained crowd, they had to explain the Kingdom of God ... Oh, how much I regret you, O Chrysost. "

In pre-war France, de Gaulle appeared in the guise of Zlatoust, and the crowd unable to hear it was the government of the Third Republic. And not only it, but also society as a whole, to which the prominent church hierarch Veniamin (Fedchenkov) gave an accurate description in 1920: “We have to agree that the population growth in France is decreasing, because the country needs an influx of immigrants. It was also pointed out the decline of agricultural farms: heavy rural work became unpleasant to the French. Easy fun life in noisy cities pulls them from villages to the centers; farms were sometimes abandoned. All this bore signs of the beginning of the weakening and degeneration of the people. It is not in vain that the French in the theaters are often shown to be bald. I personally also noted for them a relatively larger percentage of bald people than the Germans, Americans or Russians, not to mention the Negroes, where there are none at all. ”

Voice crying in Paris

In short, in the pre-war years, de Gaulle resembled a stranger from a different, knightly age, who in an unknown way turned out to be in the world of a well-fed elderly bald bourgeois who wanted only three things: peace, peace and entertainment. It is not surprising that when the Nazis occupied the Rhineland in 1936, France, as Churchill writes in his memoirs, “remained completely inert and paralyzed and thus irretrievably lost the last chance to stop Hitler without a serious war”. Two years later, in Munich, the Third Republic betrayed Czechoslovakia, in 1939-m - Poland, and after ten months - itself, abandoning real resistance to the Wehrmacht and becoming a puppet of the Reich, and in 1942-m - in its colony. And if it were not for the allies, the vast possessions of France in Africa would soon have been inherited by Germany, and in Indochina by the Japanese.

Most of the French did not object to such a state of affairs - food and entertainment remained. And if these words seem too harsh to someone, find on the Internet photos about the life of the majority of Parisians under the German occupation. In the provinces, the situation was similar. The wife of General Denikin recalled how they lived "under the Germans" in the south-west of France in the town of Mimizan. Once, English radio called on the French to commit an act of civil disobedience on their national holiday, Bastille Day: to go out in festive clothes on the streets, despite the ban. “Two Frenchmen” came out - she and her old husband-general.

Thus, in 1945, de Gaulle saved the honor of France against the wishes of the majority of its population. Saved and, as they say, went into the shadows, waiting in the wings, for so intuition prompted. And she did not let down: in 1958, the general returned to politics. By that time, the Fourth Republic had already suffered a defeat in Indochina, and could not crush the uprising in Algeria. In fact, the aggression against Egypt, the operation of the Musketeer, together with Israel and Britain, ended in collapse.

France was once again heading for disaster. About this directly declared de Gaulle. He did not conceal that he had come to save her, having become like a self-denying doctor trying to restore the youth to a decrepit old man. From the very first steps as the head of the Fifth Republic, the general came out as a consistent adversary of the United States, striving to turn the once great empire into a secondary country completely dependent on Washington. Undoubtedly, the White House’s efforts would have been successful if de Gaulle had not stood in their way. As president, he undertook a titanic effort to revive France as one of the world powers.

From this logical confrontation with the USA flowed. And de Gaulle went for it, unilaterally withdrew the country from the military component of NATO and drove the American troops out of France, collected all the dollars in their homeland and took them by plane overseas, exchanging them for gold.

Trader did not

It must be said that the general was in no position to love the States, since they had a hand in the geopolitical failures of the Fourth Republic cited above. Yes, Washington provided substantial military-technical assistance to the French troops in Indochina, but did not care to preserve the overseas possessions of Paris, but to strengthen its own positions in the region. And if the French had won, Indochina would have been prepared for the fate of Greenland - formally a Danish colony, and the bases on its territory are American.

During the Algerian War, the Americans supplied weapon neighboring Tunisia, from where it regularly fell into the hands of the rebels, and Paris could not do anything about it. Finally, it was the United States, along with the USSR, who demanded the cessation of Operation Musketeer, and the position of the seemingly allied Washington became a slap in the face for England and France.

True, the founder of the Fifth Republic’s hostility towards the United States is not only and not so much a political factor, a clash of strategic interests, but was metaphysical in nature. After all, for the true aristocrat de Gaulle, the very essence of the once created by the Freemasons, from whom the general deliberately delivered France, of American civilization with its inherent spirit of commerce and economic expansion, completely inappropriate for this man’s chivalrous attitude to life, politics and war, was alien to him.

However, de Gaulle set himself quite pragmatic geopolitical tasks. According to the compatriot General Philippe Moro-Defark, the founder of the Fifth Republic tried to “combine two usually opposite elements: on the one hand, the commitment to geographical and historical realism expressed by Napoleon at the time:“ Each state follows the geography dictated by it .. On the other hand, de Gaulle believed that it was necessary to “regain lost independence in the key area by creating nuclear deterrent forces, which should allow, in principle, independently guaranteeing Vat defense of national territory, efficiently manage their heritage, give yourself the power amplifier, through the creation of a European organization on the initiative of France, finally, we continue to pursue an independent foreign policy without regard for anyone else. "

Being an apologist for the Eurasian Union from the Atlantic to the Urals, as he himself expressed it, de Gaulle inevitably had to go closer to the USSR and West Germany, becoming in the field of geopolitics the ideological heir of the outstanding German thinker Haushofer. For it was precisely in the alliance of France with these states that the general saw the only possible way to create a strong Europe independent of the USA.

With regard to the internal policy of the president, it suffices to recall only one of his decisions: to grant independence to Algeria, who was in the grip of semi-criminal groups. Back in 1958, de Gaulle said: “Arabs have a high birth rate. This means that if Algeria remains French, France will become Arab. "

The general and in a nightmare could not have imagined that his successors would do everything possible so that France would be flooded with uncultured immigrants from North Africa, hardly knowing who I am, Ibn Rushd. During the reign of de Gaulle 17 on October 1961, five hundred French police defended the Parisians from the terrible pogrom that émigrés gathered to assemble, forty thousand strong and partly armed crowd that took to the streets of the capital. In Paris they prefer not to remember the feat of the police; on the contrary, sympathize with the victims of the brutal crowd. What is surprising, the French, for the most part now "all Charlie ..."

Alas, the ideas of the creator of the Fifth Republic to create a united Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals remained a dream. France every year more and more turns into an emigre enclave, intellectually and culturally degrading. And in the field of foreign policy is becoming increasingly dependent on the United States.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/30436
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. ovod84
    ovod84 April 30 2016 07: 03
    +9
    He was a true Frenchman who did not surrender to the Germans and continued to fight. He saw the British betrayal and knew perfectly well what the United States and the Queen's Country were like. The goal of any leader, in my opinion, is to make the state independent in economic and political terms, which De Gaulle dealt with.
  2. V.ic
    V.ic April 30 2016 07: 35
    +1
    De Gaulle is simply an exception to the rule: the Frenchman will surrender for a centime. The proud Marianne turned into a whore.
    1. Morrrow
      Morrrow April 30 2016 12: 27
      -15%
      The Russians surrendered to the Germans in 1918, betraying France and the Japanese in 1905.
      1. V.ic
        V.ic April 30 2016 13: 32
        +1
        Quote: Morrrow
        The Russians surrendered to the Germans in 1918, betraying France and the Japanese in 1905.

        Extremely dumb statement. I explain: in 1905, japas, through their sponsors, gave RI an offer to end the war (they themselves proposed = FIRST!). In 1918, the Bolsheviks, not Russians, namely the Bolshevik-Leninists / Trotskyists, on March 3, signed a separate peace treaty with the Boschs, which helped to hold out for 8 months, and it was precisely the Hans / Fritz / Karl / Adolph who lifted their paws up.
        1. Morrrow
          Morrrow April 30 2016 16: 18
          -4
          And who were the Bolsheviks in terms of national composition?
          1. V.ic
            V.ic April 30 2016 19: 04
            +4
            Quote: Morrrow
            And who were the Bolsheviks in terms of national composition?

            Well, why "blunt"? Want to hear the angry roar of the "chosen people"? The answer is mediated. Take the text of the song "Lecture on the International Situation" by VS Vysotsky. In it, find the phrase: "And there - a quarter of our former people." Here in the general composition ... it was so much. Apply the inverse proportion and get a percentage ... in the leadership echelon. The higher the nomenclature of the leadership, the fewer Russians were there. Internationalism in action.
            1. Morrrow
              Morrrow April 30 2016 20: 47
              +2
              It is strange how much I hear here everyone says that the anti-Soviet = Russophobe.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik April 30 2016 08: 21
    +9
    As now, de Gaulle lacks France .. I lost my mind, triumphed in insanity .. Thanks to the author for the article ..
    1. Morrrow
      Morrrow April 30 2016 12: 28
      -7
      De Gaulle is not needed. Need the Nazis.
  4. Aleksander
    Aleksander April 30 2016 09: 42
    +4
    to grant independence to Algeria, which has come under the power of semi-criminal groups. Back in 1958, de Gaulle said: “Arabs have a high birth rate. This means that if Algeria remains French, France will become Arab. ”


    An interesting logic - according to it, today France should grant independence to Marseilles, Toulon, etc. And tomorrow, and Paris. Then where will France retreat? belay
    And in Marseilles, the Algerians appeared precisely after the French fled from Algeria, where de Gaulle betrayed his citizens, granting independence to Algeria and thus losing to the terrorists.
  5. Cartalon
    Cartalon April 30 2016 09: 44
    +3
    For good France is a country that should not be, it exists because the Russians and Americans decided that they need France, and so the French lost the historical competition to the Germans on all counts.
    1. Morrrow
      Morrrow April 30 2016 12: 25
      0
      All of Europe lost to the Germans. European countries should not be?
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon April 30 2016 13: 09
        +1
        Well, actually all of Europe was to become a Prussian vassal
        1. Morrrow
          Morrrow April 30 2016 15: 25
          0
          The Germans are wretched in moral and cultural terms. They do not have a sense of generosity and nobility.
          1. Cartalon
            Cartalon April 30 2016 16: 25
            +1
            Have you checked them all?
            1. Morrrow
              Morrrow April 30 2016 18: 45
              +1
              They proved this by massacres of prisoners, looting, genocides, hatred of all non-Germans (Slavs and Greeks), humiliation of the defeated, destruction of cultural monuments. Not a single people of Europe has shown itself so. How do you like the purpose of the Verdun operation: "pumping out French blood"? Or the destruction of Reims with its large-caliber art? Or the castration of captured French guards by Blucher at Waterloo. Or violation of Belgium's neutrality and destruction of architectural monuments? Massacre of civilians in Belgium and France? There is such a fact. When the French entered Berlin, NO Berliner was killed. When the Prussians approached Paris, they began a massive bombardment and laid up up to 100 thousand civilian French. Such beasts as the Germans still need to be looked for. Mongols come to mind.
              1. Cartalon
                Cartalon April 30 2016 19: 41
                +2
                And what did the French do in Algeria? Sincere contempt for all nations penetrated the whole of French history, inflicting losses on the enemy in the war, what's wrong with that? The following points are generally doubtful, Paris was a besieged fortress in contrast to Berlin.
                1. Morrrow
                  Morrrow April 30 2016 19: 54
                  +1
                  So Napoleon did not destroy Prussia because he was a chauvinist? Or, therefore, the French released the Russian prisoners in 1801, and in 1805 they were treated and again released in 1807? Davout did not cut off the members of his prisoners as Blucher did. Karl the Great, Karl Martell preferred to hire Slavs for money, and not destroy them like Henry the Birds and Henry the Bear. Nobody destroyed Köln and Müchen like the cattle did with Reims.
  6. Arikkhab
    Arikkhab April 30 2016 10: 06
    +2
    it is a pity that, following the results of the Second World War, they did not accept Churchill’s proposal and did not divide France (like Germany as a losing country) into occupation zones ... maybe this would set the brains of the frogs. but now it's too late to talk about it
    1. Morrrow
      Morrrow April 30 2016 12: 26
      0
      Churchill proposed to divide Germany, but not France.
  7. Sergey-8848
    Sergey-8848 April 30 2016 12: 54
    +5
    There is an opinion that the dances in Algeria, the most unrest in Paris and France in general in 1968 were inspired by forces that did not like France’s withdrawal from NATO military structures in 1966, as well as France’s demand to exchange green waste paper for yellow metal at the declared rate . The result is the departure of de Gaulle, and the gradual colonization of the country. Only if in 1940 France fell under Hitler, then after the general left, under American financial institutions.
    The French overtook after WWII, deciding that they had enough. They didn’t have enough spirit for the second war, and even more so for subsequent colonial wars in those parts of the globe that were captured in previous centuries.
  8. bionik
    bionik April 30 2016 13: 31
    0
    ...... the French units that fought on the Wehrmacht side lost from forty to fifty thousand killed, mainly in the ranks of the SS Charlemagne volunteer divisions.The youngest soldier of the French Legion (Légion des volontaires français contre le bolchévisme - LVF) from the 638th Wehrmacht Infantry Regiment (Infanterie-Regiment 638, Französischer, later the 33rd SS Charlemagne Grenadier Division), fifteen-year-old Leon Merdjen ) on the street near the village of Golovkovo.
    1. Record Nadoev
      Record Nadoev April 30 2016 13: 48
      +4
      Quote: bionik
      The youngest soldier of the French Legion (Légion des volontaires français contre le bolchévisme - LVF) from the 638th Wehrmacht Infantry Regiment (Infanterie-Regiment 638, Französischer, later the 33rd SS Charlemagne Grenadier Division), fifteen-year-old Leon Merdjen ) on the street near the village of Golovkovo.

      He's still "French".
    2. Morrrow
      Morrrow April 30 2016 15: 25
      -6
      This is a Soviet man!
      1. Morrrow
        Morrrow April 30 2016 19: 55
        +1
        Armenian!
        1. the villain
          the villain April 30 2016 21: 43
          +1
          Quote: Morrrow
          Armenian!

          Well, if you follow your logic, then Charles De Bratz De Castelmore is the son of the Armenian people ... Dartanyan !!! wassat
  9. Verdun
    Verdun April 30 2016 14: 17
    +6
    De Gaulle is simply an exception to the rule: the Frenchman will surrender for a centime. The proud Marianne turned into a whore.
    The level of sales is not determined by nationality. Such personalities are everywhere. Yes, there were people like Peten and Vichy. But there was Charles de Gaulle. Just like in the history of Russia there were such personalities as Grigory Otrepyev and Fedor Mstislavsky, but there were Kuzma Minin and Dmitry Pozharsky. always floating on top and finding it easier. And worthy people, such as de Gaulle, are always lacking, because to climb forward in line, pushing the rest with elbows, is not in their nature. But it is precisely on them that the fate of states in the years of testing depends.
    1. Record Nadoev
      Record Nadoev April 30 2016 14: 25
      +3
      Quote: Verdun
      Such personalities are everywhere. Yes, there were people like Peten and Vichy.

      Vichy, this is a city.
      But Pétain is still in the cohort of “forty immortals”. And nobody deprived him of the marshal’s rod. You will be in Paris, go to the military museum, look at its exposition.
      1. Verdun
        Verdun April 30 2016 14: 52
        +2
        Vichy it's a city
        Sorry, a typo, as they say, according to Freud!)) Of course I meant Laval. As for the cohort, Peten got into it for his services during the First World War. And for his activities in World War II he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
        1. Record Nadoev
          Record Nadoev April 30 2016 15: 06
          +1
          Quote: Verdun
          As for the cohort, Peten got into it for his services during the First World War.

          So some of those who were caught during their lifetime "fell out". But he, no.
          In fact, the activity of Petain at that time was rethought over time. So they began to lay flowers on his grave. Now far from everyone in France considers his actions then wrong or criminal. Yes, and the Human Rights Court in Strasbourg in 1998. This is indirectly confirmed.
          1. Verdun
            Verdun April 30 2016 15: 51
            +3
            In fact, the activity of Petan at that time was rethought over time
            Life is a whimsical thing. Who knows, maybe someday General Vlasov will be honored as a hero. But personally, I would not want to participate in such celebrations.
            1. Record Nadoev
              Record Nadoev April 30 2016 16: 12
              +1
              Quote: Verdun
              and General Vlasov will be honored as a hero.

              Absolutely nothing can be ruled out.
            2. Morrrow
              Morrrow April 30 2016 16: 21
              -2
              And here is General Vlasov? When the army of the state is defeated, what to fight? By the people? Those. Do you want Pétain to put 20-30 million French for solidarity with Russia?
              1. Verdun
                Verdun April 30 2016 16: 29
                +2
                Those. Do you want Pétain to put 20-30 million French for solidarity with Russia?
                And where does solidarity with Russia? Do you think France had no self-interest?
                When the army of the state is defeated, what to fight? By the people?
                I don't think you would have convinced those who fought on the side of Fighting France.
                1. Morrrow
                  Morrrow April 30 2016 18: 29
                  -1
                  Until 1943, there were only Jews, Russians, and a couple of communists in the Battle of France.
              2. ALEA IACTA EST
                ALEA IACTA EST April 30 2016 16: 34
                +4
                Not for the sake of solidarity with Russia, but for the sake of their own freedom.
                1. Morrrow
                  Morrrow April 30 2016 18: 25
                  0
                  And their freedom until 1943, when the real Resistance began, did not interfere. There was no occupation as such. The Germans treated them as their own by order of Hitler.
                  1. ALEA IACTA EST
                    ALEA IACTA EST April 30 2016 19: 03
                    +1
                    The good attitude of the landowner towards the serf does not make the latter free.
                    1. Morrrow
                      Morrrow April 30 2016 20: 48
                      +1
                      This is all the lyrics.
  10. Rock616
    Rock616 April 30 2016 17: 43
    +6
    Degol was the first and, most likely, the last president of a FREE (not Podpindo ...... sky) France .....
    He was smart man ....
    1. tiaman.76
      tiaman.76 April 30 2016 17: 51
      +3
      laughing aptly noticed .. that's just an hour is not funny from their nonsense becomes angry
  11. igoryok1984
    igoryok1984 April 30 2016 18: 02
    +2
    "... and only the intervention of Alexander II saved her from the final defeat. A little distracted, I will note: another 40 years will pass and Russia, at the cost of the death of two of its armies in East Prussia, will again save France from inevitable defeat ..." And how did the French thank the Russians?
    1. Morrrow
      Morrrow April 30 2016 18: 32
      0
      These two points are incorrect. In 1874, the French wanted to declare war on Germany and take revenge (they then ended the reform of 1867). And in 1914, Russia could not help with anything real. Schlieffen’s plan was foiled by the French themselves. Nevertheless, monuments to Russian soldiers are everywhere from Reims to Paris.
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon April 30 2016 18: 45
        0
        Schlieffen’s plan was thwarted by Moltke the Younger, Russia helped her as much as she could, Moltke freaked out and finished off the same plan that he had already expelled, and declaring war in 1874 would be an interesting way of suicide
        1. Morrrow
          Morrrow April 30 2016 19: 06
          +1
          Suicide in 1874? Why? Then there was parity in the armed forces. Moltke could not have executed it because the counterattack near the Marne would have taken place anyway.
          1. Cartalon
            Cartalon April 30 2016 19: 32
            0
            I won’t retell entire volumes to you, Moltke violated the geometry of the plan and didn’t understand his idea, 1874 the French did not intend to declare any kind of war one by one, they could not fight the Germans at all.
            1. Morrrow
              Morrrow April 30 2016 20: 01
              +1
              He did not, at his whim, change him. Stalling in the center was inevitable, because they were seriously backing away from the plan. In addition to a slower pace, the French advanced more seriously on the left flank. Schlieffen’s plan was doomed unchanged. He is not feasible.
              1. Cartalon
                Cartalon April 30 2016 21: 14
                0
                Yeah, only Schlieffen compensated for this stall by reserves and where did the French advance along Schlieffen they had to advance, but in reality I don’t remember this
                1. Morrrow
                  Morrrow April 30 2016 23: 53
                  +1
                  They advanced in the center. In general, there was a threat of communication to the whole flank. Moltke was very afraid for them and fell into the center.
                  1. Cartalon
                    Cartalon 1 May 2016 07: 22
                    0
                    There was no advance in the center and no threats in the border battle. The Germans drove the French away. The problem was that the Germans had attacked all over the front.
                    1. Morrrow
                      Morrrow 1 May 2016 12: 42
                      +1
                      Then how did the first marna come about?
            2. Morrrow
              Morrrow April 30 2016 20: 03
              0
              Those. in 1870 having 250 thousand declared war on Prussia, and in 1874 having 600 thousand would not have declared. Where is the logic? In fact, the French beat Germans for 1000 years, starting with Clovis, Phillip 2 and ending with Tyurenn.
      2. svp67
        svp67 April 30 2016 19: 31
        +3
        Quote: Morrrow
        And in 1914, Russia could not help with anything real.

        Yes? "The French army will have to withstand the powerful onslaught of 25 German corps. I implore Your Majesty to order your troops to attack immediately. Otherwise, the French army risks being crushed," wrote French Ambassador to Russia Maurice Paleologue to the Russian Emperor Nicholas II 5 August 1914 year.
        Quote: Morrrow
        Schlieffen’s plan was foiled by the French themselves.

        Not without the help of the army of the Republic of Ingushetia, which pulled out a portion of the forces at that moment.
        "We must pay tribute to the Russian army for its noble courage and loyalty to the allies with whom it rushed into the war. If the Russians were guided only by their own interests, they would have to withdraw their armies from the border until the mobilization of a huge country is over. Instead, they simultaneously with the mobilization began a rapid advance not only against Austria, but also against Germany, "Churchill writes in his book" The World Crisis. "
        1. Morrrow
          Morrrow April 30 2016 19: 58
          +2
          In reality, only 2 army corps were transferred from the West. But at Moltke, another 4 army corps were hanging out in Belgium, it is not clear why.
          1. Cartalon
            Cartalon April 30 2016 21: 16
            0
            They didn’t hang out and Antwerp besieged or prepared to move east because of the same panic of Moltke
            1. Morrrow
              Morrrow 1 May 2016 00: 29
              +1
              And what could these two cases do? Never mind. Marna is inevitable anyway.
  12. Cartalon
    Cartalon April 30 2016 19: 45
    0
    Well, Churchill, the strategist who saved France, was in Russian interests, it would be foolish to wait until the last train from Siberia arrived
  13. Beefeater
    Beefeater April 30 2016 19: 53
    -1
    What does de Gaulle have to do with it? The process of degradation of the Western world has been going on for a long time and has affected all countries
    It was convenient for Stalin as a counterbalance to American influence and that is why France after the war retained the remains of its influence and independence
    De Gaulle created by Stalin
    1. Verdun
      Verdun April 30 2016 21: 52
      0
      De Gaulle created by Stalin
      And that is why the Free French leadership was in London during the war? You're a great original!
  14. Beefeater
    Beefeater April 30 2016 19: 58
    -1
    There is an interesting book. "The Last Soldier of the Third Reich"
    A look at the war of a Frenchman who fought on the side of the Germans
  15. Basil50
    Basil50 2 May 2016 07: 52
    +1
    What wide strokes describe both de Gaulle and even Sikorsky found words. Holists in England are credited with * purges * among the French after evacuation from the continent. Sikorsky and his neighbors were destroyed by the British along with the plane, due to communications with the Nazis, they were credited with failure to capture Norway. There are no limits to the tales of * nobleness * and * purity of thoughts * of all who are ranked among * Europeans *, forgiving colonialism and what all these respectable gentlemen did for profit. By the way, de Gaulle did not call for the abandonment of the colonies, but for the American way of robbing the colonies. A * Villains * of course AND IN STALIN and the RED ARMY who managed to protect all of humanity.