Samizdata.net reminds us that today is the anniversary of one of France’s many defeats when the British, Dutch, and the Prussians crushed Napolean Bonaparte’s army in the famous Battle of Waterloo.
Happy Waterloo Day!
Published
Samizdata.net reminds us that today is the anniversary of one of France’s many defeats when the British, Dutch, and the Prussians crushed Napolean Bonaparte’s army in the famous Battle of Waterloo.
“It was the Duke of Wellington’s greatest triumph.”
Hardly his triumph. Napoleon was creaming them until Blucher arrived. (Having been mistaken as reinforcements under Grouchy.) Outflanked and outnumbered two to one it is astounding he even got a quarter of his army out of there.
This was a Prussian victory more than anything.
Just as long as I don’t have to participate in Waterloo, Iowa, days. Iowa’s a nice state overall, but has its share of armpits, and none of those armpits is bigger or smellier than Waterloo.
Did you really expect to bash France and not get a response from me? Now I understand pointing out French failures in WW II, the Franco-Prussian War, and the first parts of WW I. But Napoleon’s defeat is not much in comparison to all this.
A. France’s defeat of Italy and Austria, which allowed the French to take over Italy and extend their eastern border to the Rhine (1796-1798)
B. The French conquest of Egypt (1798)
C. Napoleon’s defeat of Austria for the second time, when they had the help of Britain and Batavia (1801)
D. The defeat of both the Austrians and the Russians (and yes, that was Austria for three, there; 1805) and the occupation of Vienna
E. The complete defeat of Prussia at the battle of Jena (1806; Prussia ended up as a vassal state to France)
F. Napoleon’s second success against the Russians, which gave him Poland and got Russia to help him beat Sweden (1808)
G. His defeat of Britain, Spain, and Portugal, which allowed him to crown his brother King of Spain (1807-1811)
H. His fourth defeat of Austria, when it briefly dared to try to invade France (in 1809)
I. The fact that he united all of continental Europe into one gigantic empire and changed national boundaries forever.
Yes those brave Prussians who Napoleon had subjugated for 8 years, and those heroic Dutch who had been France’s who France occupied for FIFTEEN years (1795-1813). You should reconsider your European war heroes.
BTW.. Wellington was Anglo-Irish, not English!!
Let us not forget that these comments come days after French special forces rescued Americans from war torn Monrovia, Liberia. Those cowardly French.. how dare they rescue our brave Americans!! Liberia is not in France’s traditional African sphere, but atleast Paris has a leader who knows where it is. You also don’t see us rushing to help the French led UN Peacekeeping envoy in DR Congo. Apparently the Lema and Hendu people don’t deserve to be liberated from genocide. But seeing how Washington was in bed first with Mobutu and then found a better dictator to support in Kabilla, this should hardly come as a surprise. Throwing Stones from a glass house usually results in someone getting cut!!
What is with the left’s constant defense of the French??
Hey Rob.. I am no left winger. The owner of this website can surely vouch for that as he has listented to my libertarian ramblings in the past. I am a Libertarian.. and I have a knack for something called consistency. Sorry if it bothers you that I point out the fact that the US does many of the same things France does foreign policy wise. Domestically there is no comparison, we are a far more vital nation. However in the other sphere the picture gets muddier. Could I possibly interest you in a set of friendly dictator trading cards?? I encourage you to read up on our nation’s recent foreign policy history!
Rob,
I’m a recovering Libertarian, and am a libertarian-conservative today – and I’ll support the pusillanimous French on a couple of fronts.
Their special forces are excellent at what they do (although criticizing the US for its role in Africa is disingenuous, since the French have had a centuries-old role in screwing up that continent).
And yes, the French are consistent. So are the New York Mets.
OK, that was snarky. The French are like the Russians; they view the world through French-colored glasses, and do whatever they percieve to be in their interest and theirs alone. DeGaul’s legacy is that they also define “Maintaining the appearance of a great power” to be one of their interests (although not in those words). That interest is frequently at odds with the US. Hilarity ensues.
The truth, of course, is somewhere in between the extremes of American thought. Conservatives blow it by calling them cowards; while their regular military is pretty worthless, I’d not go around calling Foreign Legionnaires, Marines or their special forces “Cheese-eating surrender monkeys”. Their DGSE is a great intelligence service. And diplomatically, they have great chops, even if they’re used in pursuit of a pusillanimous policy.
But, francophiles, let’s be honest, shall we? There’s no way the French deserve the fifth permanent seat on the Security Council, or the veto. They are NOT a first-tier nation. The clout they have should naturally devolve to someone like India.
How dare those French for doing what’s in their best interest. I’m sure glad there aren’t any nations west of the Atlantic that ascribe to that mindset!!!
First off I do not defend all French policy in Africa, they have done a lot of good and bad. Liberating northern Chad from Libya, deposing the sadistic Jean-Bodel Bokassa from Central African Republic, and stepping into resolve a nasty ethnic war in Djibouti were good. Supporting Mobutu for years, helping arm the genocidal Rwandan government, peacing together this current crackpot deal in Ivory Coast are bad.
You are right.. the French marines, special forces, and foreign legion (who they say are more french than the french) are all excellent. Their regular army has struggled since world war II, although to be fair some nations have done far worse (italy, spain, holland, etc..).
I would think that combined UK/France seat might be better, or an EU seat. You cannot call France a second tier nation, and not call Britain one. IRA/Sinn Fein (as much as I hate them and their bigoted aims) have managed to completely pacify Blair and Friends into a policy of appeasement. There has never been a deal which has given so much to a terrorist organization, as the Good Friday Agreement. To see a former world power held hostage by such an organization is troubling.
Britian has the same muslim problem France does, only with South Asians as opposed to North Africans. The same race relations problems exist (remember the riots of Bradford and Oldham just over a year ago). The UK has no independant sphere of influence (unlike France, they keep their 25 African former colonies happy for not so altruistic reasons), and really has done little without the US in recent years. Blair even lacks the courage to stand up to closet facist Aznar over Gibraltar. Exceptions include the Falkand Islands.. but come on everyone knows the Argies would rather their chew spoiled beef while they dance the tango than fight. They appeased Mugabe and turned over Rhodesia to the Communists at the Lancaster Accords. The same case that can be made against France losing its seat can be made to Great Britian.
Both the UK and France need a major remake. Maybe the key difference is that the UK knows it is better of being our puppet (and don’t think for a minute “Great” Britain is anything but), and France hasn’t got the picture yet.
As much as I oppose the idea of Pax Americana, I accept it as totally inevitable!!