French Military Victories

[Gustaf]

Lol...that was kind of funny. I remember hearing from one of my many French-bashing neo-liberal friends that France had not won a war since the battle of Poitier in 732. I think that might not be entirely true, but when I started to think about it I realized that it could probably be argued.

[Gustaf]

Er... Austerlitz, Jena, Elyau, Wagram, etc...

That  is always what comes to mind first. But these were, arguably, stages in a war that was eventually lost. They did win most of the so-called "coalition wars", but they lost the 6th and 7th, and thus lost the whole thing eventually.

[Gustaf]

Lol...that was kind of funny. I remember hearing from one of my many French-bashing neo-liberal friends that France had not won a war since the battle of Poitier in 732. I think that might not be entirely true, but when I started to think about it I realized that it could probably be argued.

It is true.  An American author wrote a book about it.  Appropriatly enough entitiled '732'.

What about the 100 Years' War?

Considering the fact that France was the superpower of Europe and the UK was a peripheral state with a 5th of France's population, and still managed a territorial win, I'd say France lost that war, though it was mostly a draw.

[Gustaf]

But the French eventually managed to force the English off their soil, which counts as a victory in my book.

Well, but objectively they should have won easily. I'd call it a tie.

[Gustaf]

Also, type in 'unelectable' and see what happens

Now that's just wrong.  Who the hell put that in.  It should go to the DNC homepage.  

Haha! LOL, that's just too much!

[Gustaf]

Lewis: in the 30 years was, France was on the winning side, that's true, but they kept messing things up, their contribution to the war was mainly through resources. It's a bit like WWI in that respect. Sweden did most of the work in the 30 years war...

[Gustaf]

Lewis: in the 30 years was, France was on the winning side, that's true, but they kept messing things up, their contribution to the war was mainly through resources. It's a bit like WWI in that respect. Sweden did most of the work in the 30 years war...

Rather Pyrrhic for you, right?

I don't know about that, we managed pretty well in the end. We had better commanders, so we suffered much lower casualties tham most other countries throughout that war. It wasn't until after 1660 that we began to lose ground.

[Gustaf]

Yeah, I dont know if anyone has posted this before, but type in "weapons of mass destruction" and click im feeling lucky.

LOL that's great.

I agree, awesome!

[Gustaf]

What about War of Austrian Succession 1740-1748.  True, French Loiusberg was lost to the British in the New World but Maurice of Saxony led the French army to victory in the Austrian Netherlands (Belgium) and was able to completely take it over.  Its ally Spain, was less successful in Italy and Franc exchanged it winnings in the Austrian Netherlands for expansion of Spanish interests in Northern Italy when peace came in 1748.  While it was not a clear cut victory for France they did end the war with the upper hand.

I disagree, that war featured 2 conflicts, the Spanish-French alliance battling the British for control of the New World, and the continental conflict on Austrian Succession. France lost both of these conflicts.

[Gustaf]

I do not see it that way.  For sure French support for Bavaria's claims to Bohemia and Upper Austria in addition to the title of the Holy Roman Emperor was unrealistic.  But in Italy, France-Spain-Genoa fought Austria-Savoy to a draw.  An Austrian attempt to take over Kingdom of the Two Sicilies failed.  I agree that battle in the New World went against France and an attempt for Stuart restoration in Great Britian failed in the "Fourty-Five."  But for sure the greatest military success of the war was the decisive French victory in the Austrian Netherlands.   When peace came, France was able to trade away the Austrian Netherlands for return of all New World positions lost to Great Britian AND expansion of Spanish position in Northern Italy.  All in all, a net gain by France-Spaln over Great Britian-Austria.  And this is not to mention the Austrian loss of Silesia to French-backed Prussia.  For sure France did not "win" the war but at the peace in 1748 the Franco-Spain alliance was the net winner in terms of territory.

France started the conflict, Austria was under attack and fighting for survival, so that's why I see France as loser. I am not educated on the details on the colonial war, but I seem to remember that the last time I checked, Great Britain was viewed as the winner of that war.

[Gustaf]

I can kind of understand the American forum members for not bringing it up, but the most important (to America) French military victory against Britain is the one in the War of American Independence.

Yes, if you see that as a French victory, I suppose that would be a victory. I always though of it as an American-English conflict, with France as a supporting part, rather than as an active participant. But since French troops etc. did fight I guess you could view it as a French victory.

[Gustaf]

I'd say that the French-Hapsburg conflict in Italy ended in a humilitating defeat for the French, even though they might have cashed in some victories at an earlier stage. In the Crimean war I don't think they played a very major part, and it also wasn't much of a victory for them, just a loss for the Russians. Tukey was the main benefactor of that war.

Interesting point on WWI, but the disasters of Charleroi, the Ardennes and Lorraine in 1914, and the complete illusion that was the French battleplan, "plan XVII", have always inclined me against thinking of the French as victors. The Germans really won at every turn on the Western front, they lost due to attrition. Need I say the "Nivelle-offensive", that ended in mass mutiny as late as 1917? Not to mention the complete collapse as the Germans attacked in 1918, the "Kaiserschlacht" (though this was largely British forces as well). The allied forces never succeeded in driving the Germans back to Germany before the surrender.

[Gustaf]

To start off, I never said that there was a "war of Poiter" it says battle of Poiter in my post, so I am not all that lost...

On the issue of defining who wins a war, I agree that I might have been a little...ehh...flexible, shall we say?

It isn't that illogical though, if you lose in the end, or win b/c of HELP from other countries, despite constantly messing up, you don't win. And I maintain that the Napoleonic wars, as a whole, and WWI cannot really be seen as French victories.

However, you bring up a ton of examples, and though we have gone through a lot of them, and I disagree with most of the things on your list, I immediately concede the Italian war of independence, which was really a conflict between France and Austria and ended in a clear French victory. Don't know how I oculd forget that, but it was a whhile since i read up on my history. This was of course just a pre-match, before Germany/Prussia swept in and conquered all, but it counts nonetheless. Some of the others might be viable as well, but that's irrelevant.

I admit defeat...

For the record, I didn't originally believe in this, I just mentioned it and Supersoulty backed me up. My main interest was getting to the bottom of this, so there's no need to get hostile about it.

[Gustaf]

No hostility involved. If I sounded a little testy it was probably because of the far-fetchedness of the claim. It was particularly striking in view of having been to the Gallery of Battles in Versailles. Also, considering France's prominent place in Europe and long history, plus the fact that it is a rather smug, self-satisfied country with many monuments to past military victories.

OK, no hard feeling then.

I think that when you look at the list it's striking how few victories they have scored in major wars (not counting defeating rebels and small city states, etc). The French have always been much better at diplomacy than wars, as is shown by their wonderful breaking out of the Bismarck encirclement in the years leading up to WWI.

[Gustaf]

The French formula has generally been to lose most of the battles but due to their resources drag the war out until they could negotiate a not too bad peace due to strong diplomacy, and then manouevring into strong positions in between. But the war of Italian Independence is a clear victory. The Crimean War is more disputable, imo.

[Gustaf]

The Crimean War was a huge humiliation for Russia, no question about it being a Russian defeat, just like there's no question about the World Wars being German defeats. But that still doesn't mean that France was the winner of any of these conflicts.

[Gustaf]

I guess you could do that...the Poles have been kind of unlucky:

'We're the doormat of Europe: everyone trods on us.'

-Highlights of Hamlet

[Gustaf]

Go to google, type in 'rainman politics' and see what happens.

Lol...