Does France actually have the best military record of western nations?

[Beet]

From another forum. Valid points made here:


France accmoplished what no other European nation has ever been able to do since the Romans, which is be the dominate european power for over a century.

More so, they were the dominate European power many times and for long stretches.

Napoleonic empire was larger than any other european empire, ever.

It left no lasting remnent.

True. Except for liberalism, nationalism, Latin America, and the beginning of the End of History, (see Fukuyama, Battle of Jena), no remnant at all.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The German "empire" you refer to consisted of part of Germany plus a tiny sliver of what is now Poland, which had not been a country since the 1700's, well before German unification. It did not include the significant part of Germany controlled by Austria. Hence, it was not even a complete nation-state, let alone an empire.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And it divided after his death.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, really? The fact is, his empire was the first major empire since the Roman empire, and represented the first glimmerings of the revival of European civilization since antiquity. It was also a bulwark against North African expansion into central Europe.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

England didn't want a European empire, save for Gibraltar, which they still have.  Hanover was considered a drain and they gave Helgoland to Germany in exchange for colonial posessions.  Their European policy was not to have a powerful state holding the low countries (and the invasion staging points).
[/quote]

LOL. England's army sucked, end of story.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

See above.  After they lost their empire, they rebuilt it in 25 years.[/quote]

Once again, they only managed to keep their country united from late 1939-1944, a 5 year period out of the 2,000 year history of the German people. France on the other hand has been united almost all of its history, with a few exceptions during the Hundred Years' War. On that alone Germany should be stricken from all consideration as a military success.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Bleh bleh bleh. Spain piggybacked on Portugal's pioneering navigation and then held onto a sucky backwater that failed to develop economically while giant Spanish ships shipping back inflation into Europe couldnt' defend themselves against an uneducated Englishman on a tiny little boat (see Francis Drake). Spain's grand armada was then destroyed by a tiny little heretical island-nation led by an illegitimate heretical young woman in a single day. No European nation is more of a failure than Spain. Not to mention that it was ruled by North Africans for 800 years, the only major European nation to be ruled by Africans.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Very true.

[Beet]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Never claimed it wasn't, but now that you mention it, the Napoleonic Empire was larger. If you include overseas territories then the British Empire was larger too.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm talking about the Western front and the Battle of Tours. The north Africans were already advancing into central Europe when they were stopped by Charles "The Hammer" Martel and his Frankish army. That is historical fact. On the other hand, muslim advance as far as central Europe from the east in lieu of Byzantium is pure speculation.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I said most of its history. France had periosd of disunity yes, but it has been united almost continuously since 1450, and for a good part beforehand, (considering the nature of European political unity in the high middle ages).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The period of French dominance on the continent began with the treaty of Westphalia (1648) and ended in the 1860's once Germany's unification drive began to gain momentum. This was the result of Richelieu's nationalist efforts which began to transform Europe from an essentially Catholic or religious entity into one defined by nationalism, a process later completed by Napoleon.

[Beet]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is true, yet by this line of reasoning, you can also say the Hapsburgs' advantages were a matter of geography: Spain by virtue of being on Iberia benefitted along with Portugal with both proximity to Africa and the Cape of Good Hope on one hand, and a large Atlantic coastline on the other hand. Austria clearly benefitted from having weak neighbors. England benefitted from being defended behind the English Channel and having a large coastline, accustoming it's people to shipbuilding and navigation which helped it build it's empire.

Storebrought,

When did the muslims overrun Sicily? The Byzantines did keep a check on the muslims, but we don't know how far the muslims would have advanced without them. But their ultimate failure to hold Anatolia hardly recommends them as a foremost European power.

[Beet]

LOL. England's army sucked, end of story.

Now, now for a tiny army comprised of an... er... interesting... mix of drunks, loonies, convicts... that kind of thing... and generally led by a group of people with the collective intelligence of a gnat, it wasn't half bad

Dont forget illegitimates

[Beet]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

German nationalism had major geopolitial reprecussions. Napoleonic troops spread liberal and nationalist ideology throughout Europe, in spirit and name if not in deed, and it touched a chord in Germany. Richelieu was the one who set off Europe's march towards nationalism, but it didn't really coalesce until the Napoleonic wars. It's no coincidence that Leipzig 1813 is called the Battle of Nations.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And I point out the self-styled "Empire"'s domain was equivalent of little more than an incomplete nation-state.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You forget the country you are living in. Nevertheless, I didn't say England's navy sucked, I said her army sucked, and it did.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Once again, I point out that the grandoise "Reich" of that period failed to even unite all of Germany, let alone subjugate other European nations within its domain.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And Russia rules Siberia... whats your point? Spain's dominions were crappy and Spain screwed up big time with them.