Bataille a la baionnette France Angleterre

[Durandal OG]

Comme je le précisais dans un autre message voici, un peu d'argumentation a apporter au "French basher" qui disent que la France est un pays minable militairement parlent alors qu'ils parlent du pays qui a de très loin le plus gros palmarès de victoires. il est vrai que quand tu as autour de toi toutes les nations d'Europe les plus agressive tu te dois d'être sévèrement bur***** A noter comme il est précisé sur ce site que très souvent c'est une alliance Européenne qui est nécessaire pour battre la France ou ce faire botter les fesses par elle comme pendant la bataille de Bouvine qui est un bel exemple de la suite. Bref voici le site US qui n'est hélas plus en ligne mais que j'ai eu le temps de copier. Regardez au passage en bas du site les notes, il y a quelques notoriétés. A commencé par Jean Tulard LE grand spécialiste de l'empire (si bien sur c'est bien lui). A l'origine l'url du site est : http://web2.airmail.net/napoleon/bayonet_battles.htm 1750-1815 Battles: French vs British. Era of Modern Bayonet 1. Introduction - "The Invincibles" 2. French vs British: Battles, Combats, Actions, Skirmishes. 3. Addititional information from our visitors. 4. Links. . The authors of memoirs rarely got it right, often embellishing tales of their own bravery and exaggerating enemy’s losses. Introduction "The Invincibles" and chest-thumping You probably wonder why did we add this introduction to the list of French-English battles in th era of modern-bayonet. The answer is quite simple, after the publication of the list we begun receiving e-mails from people who claimed that we chose this period only for one reason. This is to show the so-called "low point" of their favorite (French or British) army. These people were (and some still are) genuinely convinced that their army, French or British, was invincible. There’s been well-worn chest-thumping rants, military brouhaha, about the victories and invincibility of the French and British armies by our French and English visitors. For this reason we have decided to give examples of French and British military failures and defeats suffered during other periods. Basically, this short introduction is only for the worshippers of the French and British army. If you are not one of them, go directly to the list of battles and combats. According to Julius Caesar, the nations and armies are like individuals, go through times of being more courageous or less so, according to circumstances. Every country, no matter how big and strong, had better and worse periods, periods of success and periods of failures and defeats etc. The Roman army - considered by many military experts as the best military machine - experienced just that. I would say they fell into so-called "victory disease" (according to wikipedia.org: "a habit whereby military commanders, armies, and even whole nations, having experienced a series of previous military victories, becomes susceptible to defeat. This change is often characterized by the emergence of arrogance, stereotypes of enemy, disregarding their actual military capacity etc.") France and England were two of five the most successful militarily nations. But do not believe those who claim that their troops were invincible and never defeated. The history of the two countries are full of "ups and downs" on military field. The so called superiority of this or other nation lies in their authors self-aggrandizing patriotic jingoism. Many participants of the campaigns denied their own mistakes for reasons of personal and national pride. Wellington refused to write the history of the battle of Waterloo because if he had, he would have had nothing good to say about some of the participants who were celebrated as heroes. Wellington wrote to the Earl of Mulgrave: "If a true history is written, what will become of the reputation of half of those who have acquired reputation, and who deserve it for their gallantry, but who, if their mistakes and casual misconduct were made public, would not be so well thought of ?" Below just few examples of "ups and downs" of England and France on military field. England. The English boasts of himself that he is so tough soldier that he does not know when he is beaten. Samuel Johnson wrote: "Our nation may boast, beyond any other people in the world, of a kind of epidemic bravery." :-) Reading certain accounts of English mega-prowess at war, you wonder if the English casualties are not all caused by friendly fire. The authors have a knack of turning defeat into victory in the Dunkirk style. (Mind you, the catastrophe at Dunkirk was called by many as "It is victory!" and was celebrated in speeches, paintings and poems.) You may even think they were never defeated. Actually the British were defeated not only by other Europeans (between 1750 and 1815 they lost more than 60 battles to the French alone) but also by about everyone they ever fought with; Albanians (78th Foot at Rosetta), Argentinians (in 1806-7 at Buenos Aires), Americans (at Cowpens and in 1815 at New Orleans), Poles (in 1810 at Fuengirola), native Indians (at Monongahela), Egyptians (1807 at El-Hamad or Hamaad) etc. At Cowpens "... the British infantry broke, and throwing down their guns and cartridges, made for the wagon road, and did the prettiest sort of running !" (- American eyewitness) French General Souham succeeded in taking the fortress of Nijmegen defended by 30.000 English infantry supported by 1.200 Dutch troops. After the American War of Independence the British infantry became an effective force until the parade of failed invasions on the Continent. French General Suchet defeated two British amphibious expeditions from Sicily against Spain's east coast. In 1808 British corps landed in Spain but when was threatened by Napoleon, they fled. General Moore was pushing his troops so hard that discipline almost collapsed, men deserted, and some cannons were abandoned. Moore's 200 mile run to Coruna was a very desperate one. The French knocked the stuffing out of him with the Brits being not just taken to the cleaners down to the coast by Napoleon's troops, but washed, pressed and sent home in a brown paper bag. Moore's failure was followed by the "disaster of Walcheren". In 1814 at Berg-op-Zoom the British 55th and 69th Regiment of Foot advanced in the dark then suddenly broke and fled in a wild panick. Not a shot was fired at them, nor was a single Frenchman seen." (Nafziger - "Imperial Bayonets" 1996 p 164) Defeats and/or failures suffered during other periods: About 200 BC 'England' had been invaded by Belgic peoples. 'England' was subjugated by Romans for very long time (400 years). The Roman Governor of Britain, Suetonius Paulinus, met the tribesmen in a bloody battle of Boudica. Some 80,000 of the tribesmen were slaughtered, against only 400 Roman dead. After Romans 'England' was repeatedly invaded and conquered by the Vikings. There were days when the Danes made the Brits tremble, and the English litany included the prayer, "From the fury of the Danes, Good Lord deliver Us." (ext.link) After Romans and Vikings came Normans from France (ext.link) The Norman French warriors defeated the English infantry at the Battle of Hastings (1066) and the Norman leader, William Conqueror and his descendants replaced the Anglo-Saxons as the ruling class of England. (Scotland was never conquered by "foreigners", it became part of United Kingdom and the Act of Union was signed by "bribed Scottish aristocrats" (according to nationalist Scottish history). During WW2 the japanese soldiers said they couldn't regard the British soldiers as soldiers since they "didn't fight". The Battle of Singapore was a brilliant military success by the Japanese against superior numbers and equipment of British infantry (140.000 Brits vs 40.000 Japanese !) In June 1944 at Villers Bocage German tank company single-handedly took on a column of the British 7th Armoured Division, and literally destroyed it, so forestalling General Montgomery's planned unhinging of the Wehrmacht's Caen defense. Only in this combat there were 138 destroyed British tanks and 250 destroyed armoured personal carriers, anti-tank guns and transporters. German commander's tank alone destroyed with easy 14 British tanks. Pretty good for a day's work, don't you think ? Even days after this fight just the sighting of a Tiger tank caused panic amongst British troops. During further battles German radio men sometimes picked up such messages like "Help, Help, Tiger Tank !" Montgomery banned any combat report describing the fights between German and British tanks. According to Montgomery these reports undermined the morale of his troops. However, the list of Britain's victories is much longer than defeats. There are also plenty of books, articles and websites devoted to the great British military leaders (Duke of Marlborough, Nelson, Wellington, Cromwell etc.) For those interested in the history of the British army I recommend Sir John Fortescue - "History of the British Army" France. Many military experts claimed that the French enjoyed the most on military field ("... the most militarily successful nation, the French ..." - B.H. Liddell Hart British military historian) Some disagree with it (especially the German and English-speaking). The French, as their English counterparts, had their victories and failures, no doubt about it. According to wikipedia.org the French military history is perceived in the USA as being mired by humiliating defeats (such as in the Franco-Prussian War). The French military is often the butt of jokes from comedians and political commentators such as Jay Leno. In the aftermath of the French defeat in the World War II, assessments about French military abilities suffered a significant reverse in the USA and UK. British authors want you to believe that Wellington's redcoats had exclusivity in defeating Napoleonic marshals. This is not correct, the Prussians and Russians won more battles against the French than the Brits. Below is a list of French defeats during the Napoleonic wars (and it was France's most glorious period !): Queetz - Russians defeated French (under Marshal Ney) Sacile - Austrians defeated French (under Eugene) Aspern-Essling - Austrians defeated French Kliastitzy - Russians defeated French (Oudinot) Svolna - Russians defeated French (Oudinot) Vinkovo - Russians defeated French (Murat) 2nd Polotzk - Russians defeated French (Oudinot, Victor) Viasma - Russians defeated French 2nd Krasnoi - Russians defeated French (Roguet and NAPOLEON) Plechenitzi - Russians defeated French (Oudinot) Möckern - Russians and Prussians defeated the French (Eugène) Luckau - Russians and Prussians defeated French (Oudinot) Gross-Beeren - Russians and Prussians defeated French (Oudinot) First Pirna - Russians defeated French (St. Cyr) Second Katzbach - Prussians defeated French (Macdonald) Second Pirna - Russians defeated French (Vandamme) Kulm - Russians, Prussians, Austrians defeated French (Vandamme) Dennewitz - Prussians defeated French and allies (Ney) Wartenberg - Prussians defeated French and allies (Bertrand) Möckern - Allies defeated French (Marmont) Leipzig - Russians, Prussians, Austrians defeated French (NAPOLEON) La Rothière - Russians, Austrians, Prussians, Bavarians defeated French (NAPOLEON) Bar-sur-Aube - Austrians, Russians, Bavarians defeated French (Oudinot) Lâon - Prussians, Russians defeated French (NAPOLEON) Fismes - Prussians defeated French (Marmont) Arcis-Sur-Aube - Allies defeated French (NAPOLEON) La Fère Champenoise - Russians defeated French (Marmont and Mortier) Paris - Allies defeated French ( Marmont and Mortier) The failures and defeats were not something limited only to the Napoleonic wars. World War 2 was a humilation for the French army. Even though millions of French troops were manning the defensive Maginot Line in early 1940, Hitler's brilliant blitzkrieg strategy caught the Allies by surprise. The Germans skirted the Maginot Line and slashed into France through Luxembourg and the Ardennes Forest. The Blitzkrieg moved with lightning speed as Hitler's tanks turned and raced headlong to the sea. They reached the English Channel on May 21 cutting off the French and British armies in the North. The Germans turned again, fighting their way north to secure the coastal ports and annihilate the trapped armies. Germany occupied France within just 6 weeks. And as with the English, the French have enjoyed far more victories than defeats. You can easily find books, articles and websites devoted to the battles of Austerlitz, Borodino etc. For those interested in the Napoleonic French army I recommend John Elting - "Swords Around a Throne" (excellent read) So, were the French and British armies great ? Yes. Were they invincible ? Definitely not. ~ Battles: French vs British Era of 'modern' bayonet (socket-bayonet) and musket. The term "bayonet" is thought to have derived from the French town of Bayonne, and referred to a long knife or dagger (ext.link) which was carried by soldiers. In late 1690s more emphasis began to be placed on the use of the musket as a primary weapon of the common soldier and as a result, the long pike was gradually phased out and so called plug-bayonet was introduced. It was a spear-like blade to which was attached a long conical steel plug inserted directly into the muzzle of the soldier`s musket, a collar lodging against the barrel to prevent it sliding too far in. The disadvantage of this bayonet was that once fixed, the gun cannot be fired until the bayonet was removed. The new , socket-bayonet first appeared in the French army in the 1670s but it was not until 1715 (in British army circa 1725) when the familiar triangular section bayonets were introduced as the new standard pattern. The bayonet had the blade attached to a hollow sleeve which slipped over the muzzle of the musket. The blade was below the axis of the barrel and left clearance to permit the musket to be loaded and fired while the bayonet was fixed. The triangular socket bayonets were used in the following wars between France and Great Britain: - 1741-1748 : War of the Austrian Succession - 1756-1763 : Seven Years War (incl. the French and Indian War) - 1792-1802 : Revolutionary Wars (incl. French invasion of Ireland) - 1802-1815 : Napoleonic Wars The bayonets were also used in many other wars but not between the French and British. Battle/Combat/Action French victory British victory June 1743 Dettingen - German-British victory May 1745 Fontenoy French victory - Oct 1746 Roucoux French victory - July 1747 Lauffeldt French victory - Nov 1747 Berge-op-Zoom French victory - 1748 Maastricht French victory - July 1754 Fort Necessity French-Indian victory - July 1755 Monongahela River French-Indian victory - Aug 1756 Oswego French victory - July 1757 Hastenbeck French victory - Hannoverian-German-British army led by the Duke of Cumberland, son of King George II of Great Britain. Aug 1757 Fort William Henry French victory - Jun 1758 Louisbourg - British victory Jul 1758 Ticonderoga French victory - April 1759 Bergen French-Saxon victory - June 1759 Fort Niagara - British-Indian Aug 1759 Minden - German-British Sep 1759 Quebec - British victory Sep 1760 Montreal - British victory Oct 1781 Yorktown American-French victory - May-Aug 1793 Siege of Valenciennes - Austrian-Hannov. -British victory Aug-Dec 1793 Toulon French victory - 6-8 Sep 1793 Hondeschoote French victory - 17-18 May 1794 Tourcoing French victory - 22 Aug 1798 Killala Bay French victory - 27 Aug 1798 Castlebar French victory - 5 Sep 1798 Callooney French victory - 8 Sep 1798 Ballinamuck French victory ? - 12 Oct 1798 Donnegal - British 19 Sep 1799 Bergen Op Zoom French victory - 2 Oct 1799 Bergen op Zoom - Russian-British 6 Oct 1799 Casstricum French victory - 20 March 1801 Canopus - British 6 July 1806 Maida - British 15 Aug 1808 Rolica - British-Portug. 21 Aug 1808 Vimeiro - British-Portug. 21 Dec 1808 Sahagun - British 29 Dec 1808 Benevente - British 16 Jan 1809 Coruna French victory - 12 May 1809 Oporto - British 27 June 1809 Casa de Salinas French victory - 16 July 1809 Flushing - British 28-29 July 1809 Talavera - British-Spanish July-Dec 1809 Walcheren French victory - 16-24 May 1810 Siege of Mequinenza French victory - 10 July 1810 Barquilla French victory - 24 July 1810 Coa River French victory Ney defeated Craufurd. - 11 Aug 1810 Villagarcia French victory - 27 Sep 1810 Bussaco The Brit-Portug. repelled the assaults of French troops but were nevertheless forced to withdraw. According to Jac Weller Busaco was "a technical defeat [for the British] although claimed as victory" - 13 Oct 1810 Fuengirola Polish-French victory - 5 March 1811 Barossa - British 11-15 March 1811 Series of skirmishes at: Pombal, Redinha, Casal Novo, Foz do Arouce - British-Allies 25 March 1811 Campo Mayor - British 29 March 1811 Guarda - British 3 April 1811 Sabugal - British-Portug. April 1811 2nd Siege of Olivenza - British April-May 1811 Blockade of Almeida French victory - April-May 1811 2nd Siege of Badajoz French victory - 5 May 1811 Fuentes de Onoro French The French claimed victory, because they won the passage at Poco Velho, cleared the wood, turned the British right flank, obliged the cavalry to retire, and forced Wellington to relinquish 3 miles of ground. British-Portug. The British also claimed victory because the village of Fuentes was in their hands and their object (covering the blockade of Almeida) was attained. The French, without being in any manner molested, retired. 16 May 1811 Albuera British commander Beresford was certain he was defeated. Wellington's reaction to Beresford's account was: "Write me down a victory". In strategic terms it was a defeat for the British, since it forced Wellington to give up the rest of the 1811 campaign. draw ? British casualties 6,000 killed, wounded and prisoners French casualties were 5.936 (British authors "upgraded" the French losses to 7,000, 8,000 and even 10,000) 25 May 1811 Usagre - British May-June 1811 3rd Siege of Badajoz French victory - June 1811 Operations around Almeida French victory - 22 June 1811 Elvas French victory - 25 Sep 1811 Carpio de Azaba - British 25 Sep 1811 El Bodon French victory. Wellington was caught too dispersed by Marmont and was driven back several km in disorder. - 27 Sep 1811 Aldea da Ponte - - 28 Oct 1811 Arroyo dos Molinos - British-Portug. 29 Dec 1811 Membrillo French victory - Dec 1811 - Jan 1812 Siege of Tarifa - British-Portug. Jan 1812 Siege of Ciudad Rodrigo - British-Portug. March-April 1812 4th Siege of Badajoz - British-Portug. 11 April 1812 Villagarcia French victory - 18 May 1812 Almaraz - British 11 June 1812 Maguilla French victory - June 1812 Siege of Salamanca Forts - British 21 June 1812 Lequeito - British July 1812 Siege of Castro - British 18 July 1812 Castrejon French victory - 18 July 1812 Castrillo - British 22 July 1812 Salamanca - British-Portug. -Spanish July-Aug 1812 Siege of Santander - British 23 July 1812 Garcia Hernandez - British 11 Aug 1812 Malajahonda French victory - Sep-Oct 1812 Siege of Burgos French victory. It forced the British to withdraw all the way back to Portugal and give up Madrid. - 23 Oct 1812 Venta del Pozo French victory - 25 Oct 1812 Villa Muriel French victory - 28 (23 ?) Oct 1812 Villadrigo - British 28 Oct 1812 Tordesillas French victory - 30 Oct 1812 Puente Larga - British 10-11 Nov 1812 Alba de Tormes - British 17 Nov 1812 San Munoz French victory - 20 Feb 1813 Bejar - British 12-13 April 1813 skirmishes at: Biar and Castalla - British-Allies 2 June 1813 Morales - British June 1813 Siege of Tarragona French victory - 18 June 1813 skirmishes at: Osma and San Milan - British-Allies 21 June 1813 Vittoria - British-Portug. -Spanish 24 June 1813 Villafranca French victory - 26 June 1813 Tolosa - British 25 July 1813 Roncesvalles French victory - 25 July 1813 Maya French victory - July-Aug 1813 Siege of San Sebastian French-Allies victory - 26-28 July 1813 Sorauren French-Allies victory - 30 July-1 Aug 1813 Sorauren - British July-Aug 1813 Blockade of Tarragona French victory - 31 July - 1 Aug 1813 series of skirmishes at : Venta de Urroz, Sumbilla and Yanzi - British-Spanish 2 Aug 1813 Lizaso French victory - 31 Aug 1813 San Marcial - Spanish-British Aug-Sep 1813 Siege of San Sebastian - British 13-14 Sep 1813 skirmishes at: Ordal and Villafranca French victory - 7 Oct 1813 Bidassoa - British, Germans Portug. 7 Oct 1813 Vera French victory - 10 Nov 1813 Nivelle. - British 9-13 Dec 1813 series of skirmishes at: Villefranque, Nive, Anglet, Arcangues Barrouillet and St. Pierre - British-Allies 16 Jan 1814 Molins de Rey French victory - Feb-April 1814 Siege of Bayonne French victory - 15-25 Feb 1814 series of skirmishes at: Garris, Arriverayte and S. Etienne - British-Allies 27 Feb 1814 Orthez - British 8 March 1814 Bergen op Zoom French victory - 17 March 1814 Daunia's Raid French victory - 19 March 1814 Vic-Bigorre French victory - 20-24 March 1814 skirmishes at: Tarbes and Etauliers - British-Allies 8 April 1814 Croix de Orade - British 10 April 1814 Toulouse draw The French call it their victory. They lost only 3.200 draw The British call it their victrory. The British-Spanish casualties 4.500 14 April 1814 Bayonne French victory - 16 June 1815 Quatre Bras draw ? victory ? The French stayed on the battlefield. They lost only 4.000 draw ? defeat ? Wellington retreated after battle and failed in joining Blucher. Casualties 4.800, heavier than French. 17 June 1815 Genappe French victory - 18 June 1815 Waterloo - German-British -Netherland victory French British and Allies * Total victories 63 60 * * - the majority of 'French battles' was won by the French alone (but not all, the French also used foreigners), while a vast majority of 'British battles' was won by a mix of German, British and other troops. Often the British troops consisted only few percentages or half of the victorious army and it's very difficult to call their victories as only 'British'. For example at Waterloo the British infantry battalions consisted of 30 % of all battalions. In contrast the Germans made up 50 % (!) Approx. 20 % were Dutch and Belgian battalions. So it was rather an international or German victory over the French, and not British. ~ Additional Information From Our Visitors. 1. From Mark Townsend (England), he wrote us an interesting info: "One point which may or may not be of interest, the last British battle where bayonets were used, was during the 1982 Falkland's war. The Scot's Guards were given the order to fix bayonets before charging Argentine positions on Mount Tumbledown." 2. From J. Tremblay (France): "Greetings... Soult won battle against Wellington at Toulouse. First the question of losses. The French had lost near 4000 men while the Brits lost at least 8000. Secondly: the French position has never been taken nor pierced by the enemies. Moreover the Brits were exausted and gave up that position. Thirdly: this represents a strategic victory for the French but Soult obeyed senat's acts and from the provisional governor and thus the war ended in the "Midi de la France." Nicoles Gotteri (France): "Toulouse correspond à un incontestable succès stratégique." Jean Tulard (France): "Qualifiée de défaite française, cette bataille mérite plutôt le nom de victoire française, dans la mesure où le plan de Soult a réussi et celui de Wellington a échoué, sans parler des pertes ennemies deux fois plus lourdes." Links. Prussian Army ~ Russian Army Napoleon, His Army and Enemies

[roland]

bonjour,

le site existe toujour et il est là

bon site effectivement légèrement biaisé pro-français pour une fois.

ça change de la m**** anglo habituelle ;)

[Durandal OG]

A trés bien. merci :)

[Extramusicaman]

Merci même si j'ai du mal avec l'anglais je le met tout de suite dans mes favoris...

[desorgues]

petite nuance le french bashing est plus un exercice outre atalantqiue que outre manche.

[roland]

petite nuance le french bashing est plus un exercice outre atalantqiue que outre manche.

hmmm je ne suis pas convaincu.

Mais avec les Rosbifs il me semble que c'est moin mechant, plus lèger, que c'est plus du second degre.

De toute façon on leur rend bien et puis on a régulierement l'occasion de leur botter le cul au Rudby, Foot, Formule 1 et voile [28]

Juste les ricains ne sont pas invités dans ce petit jeux et ils sont tellement influents que ça fait tache et maintenant des fois tu vois debarquer un petit branleur, disons Indou, qui vient t'expliquer qu'on a jamais su faire la guerre. Enervant.

[Extramusicaman]

oui c'est vrai qu'avec les anglais c'est plus amicale, enfin c'est comme sa avec ceux que je connais^^

[Durandal OG]

petite nuance le french bashing est plus un exercice outre atalantqiue que outre manche.

Je sais bien Rule et je respect énormémént les Anglais sauf peu être pour Mers Elkebir. [04]

mais les US aiment bien nous comparer avec les Anglais, ils doivent se sentir plus Anglais que Français. [11]

[LYON 3]

le probleme c'est que l'angleterre a volé la majorité des colonies françaises en ameriques pendant que les français se battaient contre les autres pays europeens payaient souvent par les anglais.

[LYON 3]

heureusement que les anglais etaient sur une ile et avaient une bonne marine pour les proteger sinon je n'imagine pas le nombre de fois ou ils auraient ete envahi exepte guillaume le conquerant et les romains.

[Durandal OG]

le probleme c'est que l'angleterre a volé la majorité des colonies françaises en ameriques pendant que les français se battaient contre les autres pays europeens payaient souvent par les anglais.

Et oui ils ont souvent eu de tres bon diplomates et nous avec notre grande gueule, l'art de nous faire des amis un peu trop chaleureux..

[Durandal OG]

heureusement que les anglais etaient sur une ile et avaient une bonne marine pour les proteger sinon je n'imagine pas le nombre de fois ou ils auraient ete envahi exepte guillaume le conquerant et les romains.

Et les Danois et les Norvégiens, Et les Saxons.

[desorgues]

Oui enfin chersLyon 3 et Roland, je peux te parler de mon expérience parce que j'aila double nationalité. Il ya une presse populaire europhobe qui certes n'aime pas la France mais globalment la France n'a jamais été aussi populaire en France et il ne faut pas oublier que si le gvt britannique est allé en Irak l'écrasante majorité de l'opinion suivait les positions françaises. Sur Mers el Kebir, hélas à mon sens c'était inévitable et le sabordage de Toulon a par ailleurs confirmé la justesse d'analyse de Churchill. Analyse apprivée par De Gaulle dans ces mémoires. Etre sur une ile effectivement n'est pas le gage d'avoir une tres bonne marine. La politique consistat à avoir un tonnage deux fois superieurs à la seconde marine de guerre mondiale a été le secret de la réussite maritime anglaise. Et cette doctrine pendant un siecle n'a pas changé. La France puissance continentale a eu ses génies militaires dans l'armée de terre. Le Royaume Uni dans la marine: Françis Drake, Nelson ou le Baron Fisher dans l'organisation de la marine. Il a peut etre manqué la constance britannique dans la marine pour la France dans sona rmée de terre. Et puis l'armée de terre anglaise puis du royaume Uni a eu ses echecs mais aussi ses victoires : Crecy, Azincourt, Waterloo, El Al Amein. Ce n'était pas si mal pour un pays insulaire. Enfin il est vrai que la dipolomatie britannique de William Pitt jusuq'à nos jouirs contre l'axe franco allemand à eu une constante : faire en sorte qu'auncunepuissance contionentale ne domine ouvertement l'Europe. Ils ont gagné contre Napoléon, Guillaume II, Hitler. L'influence britannique a souvent été une chance pour l'Europe.

[loki]

waterloo est autant une victoire prussienne qu'anglaise .......

[Durandal OG]

Bien plus Prussienne.. Tu as non seulement l'armée prussienne présente mais egalement toutes les troupes allemande les "king germans legions" de l'armée Anglaise. 50% Prussienne 30% Anglaise 20% Belges/Hollandais. RB a raison quand tu regarde le Japon pendant longtemps il n'avait pas de marine, leurs besoins de posséder une marine puissante arrive trés tard, ou il passe de la quasi rennaissance à l'ere moderne en un clin d'oeil pour donner sur mer aux Russes une leçon mémorable. Par contre dire que les Anglais ont gagné face a Napoléon c'est un peu limite car c'est oublié que c'est un gros travail d'équipe et avant l'Angletterre je place Les Prussiens, les Russes, les Autrichiens. je ne parle même pas des petits états allemands. même chose face a Hitler, l'Angleterre sans la France pour bloquer les Allemands un an et le tres gros soutien + finalement la participation des USA l'Angleterre succombe a Hitler. C'est exactement comme dire que la France a vaincue l'allemagne en 1918. Je préfére le mot participer a vaincre. ;-)

[LYON 3]

crecy et azincourt sont des victoires anglaises de la guerre de cent ans mais la guerre de cent ans fut remportée par la france,waterloo n'est en aucun cas une victoire anglaise l'angletterre n'a pas vaincu napoleon par les armes il s'est vaincu lui-meme en attaquant la russie.on peut dire que l'angleterre a contribué à sa defaite par l'argent mais pas par les armes.car ce n'est pas les armées anglaises qui remporterent les victoires contre napoleon(pas en majorité). les prussiens,autrichiens,russes etc... etaient l'epee de l'angleterre qui elle les financeaient.l'angleterre "seule" n'a jamais gagné de guerre contre la france.elle en a perdue plusieurs et s'est fait meme envahir plusieurs fois. je pense effectivement qu'ils n'avaient pas les moyens de lutter militairement contre la france donc ils ont toujours trouvé le moyen de financer des pays quand ils voulaient la guerre à la france par ce qu'ils savaient que seul ils ne pouvaient rien.certes leur marine a toujours ete superieure(sauf à une periode ou la france et l'espagne l'avaient rattrapée. c'est cette marine et la mer qui a sauvé l'angletterre de nombreuses invasions continentales.d'ailleurs au moyen-age l'angletterre debarquaient souvent en france pour faire la guerre mais ne la jamais conquise,alors que si la france avaient pu avoir la marine pour debarquer à sa guise en angleterre,elle aurait conquise de nombreuses fois l'angletterre.d'

[Extramusicaman]

Si Waterloo quoi que l'on en dise reste une victoire Anglaise, même si les Prussien y sont pour beaucoup dans la victoire! ce qui me géne avec waterloo c'est la propagande Anglaise qui dans ces bataille semble systématiquement oublié ces allié(si on regarde un documentaire Anglais sur la PGM on a l'impression que seul l'angleterre a combattu et que les Français et les Russe etait juste la pour faire joli... pareil pour la guerre de crimée!) L'epoque napoléonienne reste une exeption car j'ai l'impression que les historien et l'opinion Britanique(Loki et Rule Brit pourront m'eclaircir la dessus) garde un respect assez important face a l'empereur et pour cause, les seul doc brit que j'ai vu autre que sur l'armée anglaise sont soit sur l'armée Us(pigeon oblige) soit sur napoléon!. Attention je parle pour une certaine catégorie de reportage(les plus répandu) il est vrai que tout les historien britannique ne sont pas comme sa non plus!

[loki]

les Anglais et les Américains ont beaucoup de respect pour napoléon ( tout comme pour l'armée allemande au XXiè siècle ), auraient-ils plus de respect pour leurs adversaires ( pas napoléon pour les USA ) que pour leurs alliés ?

[LYON 3]

Si Waterloo quoi que l'on en dise reste une victoire Anglaise, même si les Prussien y sont pour beaucoup dans la victoire! ce qui me géne avec waterloo !

je dirai plutot:si waterloo quoique l'on dise reste une victoire prussienne meme si les anglais y sont pour quelque chose.[14]

[Extramusicaman]

les Anglais et les Américains ont beaucoup de respect pour napoléon ( tout comme pour l'armée allemande au XXiè siècle ), auraient-ils plus de respect pour leurs adversaires ( pas napoléon pour les USA ) que pour leurs alliés ?

j'"en ai bien l'impression

[Ljuboja94]

Ils ont oublié Azaincourt, calais etc (la guerre de 100 ans)

[Fenrir]

Normal cela couvre la partie moderne des conflits et non la partie médieval.

[desorgues]

j'ai remarqué depuis quelques mails que loki sombre dans l'anglophobie primaire. Mais bon Pour revenir à Waterloo les Prussiens de Blucher ont joué un role decisif mais de là àdire que les troupes de wellington n'ont pas contribué à la victoire il faut pas poussé. la formation de carrés mettant en difficulté les charges de la cavlerie lourde de Ney ou les terribles combats autour de hougoumont attestent la valeurs des troupes britanniques au meme titre que les troupes française. Napoleon pour eviter la defaite devait battre rapidemnt les anglais de wellington et s'assurer l'arrivée de grouchy avant blucher. Les Anglais ont tenu grace à des tactiuqes défnesives ingénieuses et Blucher a mis l'estoquade. Concernant le piod et le role de la grande bretagne il est énorme face à Napoléon. ET la défaite de Trafalgar a été une victoire stratégiquement importante beaucoup plus importante que Auzterlitz. Le maintien dans la guerre de l'argent, de la flotte mais aussi de l'armée anglaise de façon continuelle a contribué à reconstituer les coaltions alliés au moment du zenith de Napoléon. Ce dernier jouait à chaque fois son va tout. William pitt le jeune à sa mort . la siprematie navale a maintenu l'Angletrre dans la guerre et à la veille de sa mort en 1806 il aura cette phrase prémonitoire "Roll up that map; it will not be wanted these ten years".

[loki]

voilà ce que j'ai dit : "waterloo est autant une victoire prussienne qu'anglaise ..." tu vois où l'anglophobie primaire ? le rôle de blucher a été essentiel ( sans lui waterloo était une victoire française ) tout comme celui de wellington. Je suis en désaccord sur l'importance stratégique supérieure de trafalgar par rapport à austerlitz : - trafalgar est intervenu après que napoléon est entamé sa campagne d'autriche , elle n'a pas joué dans l'arrêt de la campagne d'angleterre ( boulogne )... alors que si austerlitz avait été une défaite c'en était fini de Napoléon .

[desorgues]

oui mais trafalgar a maintenu l'angleterre dans la guerre et empeché le debarquement des troupes napoleoniennes en Angleterre la pharse de pii est d'une clarté