Support NeoGAF

[Dirk Benedict]

Fan fiction.

Do you imagine any person in power would be that just and self aware. To actually have the mental clarity to want to question themself and hold themselves to a high standard. Imagine trump or Putin writing such a thing. You cannot. Therefore it must be fake.

Of course I’m being sarcastic. Just started reading meditations my question is why the hell isn’t this being taught in schools. Oh wait. Strong stable stoic people cannot be ruled or controlled by base things such as quick fame fortune. Desires etc. I can’t see those types of people being a cash market in todays social media age.

Fucking beautiful comment, man...

 

[FunkMiller]

Everyone realises she saw all that social media guff about men thinking about the Roman empire at least once a day, and decided to play off of it for her own clicks, right?

Nobody actually thinks she believes what she’s saying, do they?

 

[LiquidMetal14]

You can't stop the train of misinformation these days and unfortunately so many people just want attention at all costs.

It's going to end up causing more issues than people think since people are stupider than ever (IQ wise) and it's easier to spread false things more than ever now.

I always cringe at this stuff. It just sucks to see.

Keep in mind we wore onions on our belts.

 

[Toots]

also ha ha France, no French people, the resistance did not liberate Paris, all they did was rob cigarette trucks and fight with each other (exaggerating, but the French are the kings of historical revision, calling Churchill tanks French tanks, seriously?)

So the A stands for Anus ?

you talk about historical revision, but were you there ?
Get a life you nerd

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Mind bogglingly brash to say not a single primary source document when we've literal writing on the walls from the Romans.

A lot of dicks, specifically huge dicks. And if there’s no dick the writing is obscene.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Everyone realises she saw all that social media guff about men thinking about the Roman empire at least once a day, and decided to play off of it for her own clicks, right?

Nobody actually thinks she believes what she’s saying, do they?

I can't tell. There are so many loons out there. There are also a lot of piss-takers. I have no idea. I just assume everyone is lying on TikTok.

 

[winjer]

So the A stands for Anus ?

you talk about historical revision, but were you there ?
Get a life you nerd

But he is mostly right.
The French resistance work was severely overblown, mostly by De Gaulle, because France stayed down for most of the war.
The reality is that the French resistance was was more of a liability, than anything else. The British and US even had to stop giving weapons to them, because they were using those weapons to fight each other, more than fighting the Germans.
And when France was liberated, it was by US and British armies. Not by the French Resistance. When De Gaulle made his speech about the French Resistance liberating France, it was a shock to everyone, especially the Allies, who had done all the work.
There were French units created, to fight along side, but these also proved to be a liability, because these units lacked discipline and leadership.

 

[Red5]

Social media gave a podium to every idiot and nutjob out there.

 

[BlackTron]

What's so strange about that? Doesn't everybody think about the Roman Empire at least three times a week?

Point is, even deniers spend a lot of time thinking about it.

 

[MrA]

So the A stands for Anus ?

you talk about historical revision, but were you there ?
Get a life you nerd

Truth must be painful, probably not going to like this one either
French communists and other left-wing groups provide aid to the Nazis during the invasion, ranging from working to undercut morale to outright sabotage,

 

[Toots]

But he is mostly right.
The French resistance work was severely overblown, mostly by De Gaulle, because France stayed down for most of the war.
The reality is that the French resistance was was more of a liability, than anything else. The British and US even had to stop giving weapons to them, because they were using those weapons to fight each other, more than fighting the Germans.
And when France was liberated, it was by US and British armies. Not by the French Resistance. When De Gaulle made his speech about the French Resistance liberating France, it was a shock to everyone, especially the Allies, who had done all the work.
There were French units created, to fight along side, but these also proved to be a liability, because these units lacked discipline and leadership.

I never said that he was not mostly right, i just used the Ridley Scott defense.
Still saying French are the king of revisionism is a bit much, isn't it ?
Sounds like what a dude who's girl left him for a bigger dicked french boy would say

Plus you are talking about France liberation as if it was just a matter of being here on D-Day. Coordination on the French soil would not have been possible without French résistance. I don't think you grasp how many casualities have been prevented by the work of French on their soil.
De Gaulle did not bow down to the english or the US because he knew what type of shit they were up to (imposing their imperialistic views upon the world). He wanted for France to stand by herself and managed to do it, which is partly why you learned such drivel in your history lessons. You are talking about french soldiers as if they were half savages, like barbarians unable follow orders. You must be forgetting that a century ago French had the greatest army ever and conquered, by themselves, most of Europe and were only defeated by a coalition of everyone else because that how boss l'Armée napoléonienne was. Remember that Westpoint is just a copy of the French école polytechnique and that, to this day, anglosaxons need to picture French people as cowardly in all their cultural representations, just because French are the last people they feared.

 

[FunkMiller]

I can't tell. There are so many loons out there. There are also a lot of piss-takers. I have no idea. I just assume everyone is lying on TikTok.

In this case, i find it extremely hard to ignore the fact that her 'fame' is coming right off the back of a meme that was very popular for five minutes.

Always best these days to assume that everyone on social media of any kind is doing what they are doing for money, and are lying/manipulating to increase clicks/subscriptions/likes.

 

[FunkMiller]

Plus you are talking about France liberation as if it was just a matter of being here on D-Day. Coordination on the French soil would not have been possible without French résistance. I don't think you grasp how many casualities have been prevented by the work of French on their soil.
De Gaulle did not bow down to the english or the US because he knew what type of shit they were up to (imposing their imperialistic views upon the world). He wanted for France to stand by herself and managed to do it, which is partly why you learned such drivel in your history lessons. You are talking about french soldiers as if they were half savages, like barbarians unable follow orders. You must be forgetting that a century ago French had the greatest army ever and conquered, by themselves, most of Europe and were only defeated by a coalition of everyone else because that how boss l'Armée napoléonienne was. Remember that Westpoint is just a copy of the French école polytechnique and that, to this day, anglosaxons need to picture French people as cowardly in all their cultural representations, just because French are the last people they feared.

Brave to mount a defence of France's combat record in references to the second word war, given that the one word that arises more often than any other when discussing Germany's successful and fast invasion of the country in 1940 is 'unopposed'.

 

[winjer]

I never said that he was not mostly right, i just used the Ridley Scott defense.
Still saying French are the king of revisionism is a bit much, isn't it ?
Sounds like what a dude who's girl left him for a bigger dicked french boy would say

Plus you are talking about France liberation as if it was just a matter of being here on D-Day. Coordination on the French soil would not have been possible without French résistance. I don't think you grasp how many casualities have been prevented by the work of French on their soil.
De Gaulle did not bow down to the english or the US because he knew what type of shit they were up to (imposing their imperialistic views upon the world). He wanted for France to stand by herself and managed to do it, which is partly why you learned such drivel in your history lessons. You are talking about french soldiers as if they were half savages, like barbarians unable follow orders. You must be forgetting that a century ago French had the greatest army ever and conquered, by themselves, most of Europe and were only defeated by a coalition of everyone else because that how boss l'Armée napoléonienne was. Remember that Westpoint is just a copy of the French école polytechnique and that, to this day, anglosaxons need to picture French people as cowardly in all their cultural representations, just because French are the last people they feared.

I was only referring to the French Resistance part during WW2.
The French Resistance only significant contribution was intel about German forces. But even that, was only one part of the puzzle.
There was also allied aerial recognizance, French military maps from before the war, etc.
In the grand scheme of things, the French resistance was not of great importance.

Yes, the portrayal of the French Army as cowards who surrender is overblown, especially when we consider that just a little over a century back, France had put Europe to it's knees, several times.
But this idea doesn't show up from nothing. The fact remains, that WW2 was the biggest war in human history and it is still a recent event that marks our lives today.
So when the French army lost so badly, there is a nugget of truth to the concept.

 

[Toots]

Brave to mount a defence of France's combat record in references to the second word war, given that the one word that arises more often than any other when discussing Germany's successful and fast invasion of the country in 1940 is 'unopposed'.

Have you heard of a little country called Belgium ?

Look at it this way :

You know im going to your place to screw your wife. Your wife knows it (and she's down with it), your neighbours knows it too. You have secured the front of your house and you're feeling good. There's still the small problem of the connecting door from your neighbour place to your bedroom, but he assured you he won't let me pass. He even swore, plus you know each other for such a long time there's no way he'd fuck you like that, right ?

Wrong, I'm already in your bed with your wife. I made a deal with your neighbour to use the connecting door and there's nothing you can do about it.

Sorry i had to screw your wife to show you the errors in your ways, but really, as any frenchman will tell you, it's the best way to learn.

 

[winjer]

Have you heard of a little country called Belgium ?

Look at it this way :

You know im going to your place to screw your wife. Your wife knows it (and she's down with it), your neighbours knows it too. You have secured the front of your house and you're feeling good. There's still the small problem of the connecting door from your neighbour place to your bedroom, but he assured you he won't let me pass. He even swore, plus you know each other for such a long time there's no way he'd fuck you like that, right ?

Wrong, I'm already in your bed with your wife. I made a deal with your neighbour to use the connecting door and there's nothing you can do about it.

Sorry i had to screw your wife to show you the errors in your ways, but really, as any frenchman will tell you, it's the best way to learn.

But during WW2, the Germans didn't break through in Belgium. Although there was the "Fall Gelb"
Germany broke through at Sedan, where France had it's Second Army, led by Charles Huntziger.
In one of the most idiotic moves of the war, Huntziger not only refused the aerial support that the French First Army offered to transfer, but also retreated from the Maginot line, to much weaker positions.
And he placed his reserve troops, comprised of older troops, where the French hit. And he had the building of his front of the Maginot line behind schedulle.
So it was just screw up after screw up, that allowed the Germans to breakthrough so easily. And lucky for the Germans, the rest of the French Generals were almost as incompetent, so the German push just kept on going and going.

On a positive note, Huntziger was tried and executed after the war for treason, after he collaborated with the Germans, while being a part of the Vichy government.

 

[22:22:22]

How do you find these vids EviLore

 

[AudioSlave92210]

Etats-Unis d'Amérique et véracité des faits historiques, c'est juste antinomique.
Don't be so proud my Americans friends, you lost all yours wars since WWII but you still haven't understood.
Love you anyway...

 

[winjer]

Etats-Unis d'Amérique et véracité des faits historiques, c'est juste antinomique.
Don't be so proud my Americans friends, you lost all yours wars since WWII but you still haven't understood.
Love you anyway...

Truth be told, the USA didn't lose many military wars. But they lose the political side.
A good example was the Vietnam war, where the US was inflicting massive casualties, compare to their loses.
Even the Tet offensive was a major military failure for the Vietcongs. But the US public opinion about the war, reached a peak because of that.
So a military victory, became a political defeat for the USA.
A similar thing goes for the Iraq and Afghan war. The USA won a military war, but was not able to establish stable political rule in either country.

 

[Alebrije]

Yea for a lot of people these days sources are:

Primary : Tiktoker , Youtuber..or similar social media.

Secondary : Google general search result

Third : Wikipedia

Fourth : Actually a book , teacher, library, or any reliable information sources..

But this is not new...I remember kids taking references from GOW when talking about Greek culture.

The problem with social media is that is Massive.

 

[Toots]

But during WW2, the Germans didn't break through in Belgium. Although there was the "Fall Gelb"
Germany broke through at Sedan, where France had it's Second Army, led by Charles Huntziger.
In one of the most idiotic moves of the war, Huntziger not only refused the aerial support that the French First Army offered to transfer, but also retreated from the Maginot line, to much weaker positions.
And he placed his reserve troops, comprised of older troops, where the French hit. And he had the building of his front of the Maginot line behind schedulle.
So it was just screw up after screw up, that allowed the Germans to breakthrough so easily. And lucky for the Germans, the rest of the French Generals were almost as incompetent, so the German push just kept on going and going.

On a positive note, Huntziger was tried and executed after the war for treason, after he collaborated with the Germans, while being a part of the Vichy government.

I'm more of a neophyte on the subject than you, but i pretty sure that with ligne Maginot we got screwed first by the belgians who did not let us built it full, and the dumb general (who by the way died in a plane crash in 1941 and was never judged for his actions, not even posthumously, to my knowledge) was just the cherry on top.

"The Maginot Line was impervious to most forms of attack. Consequently, the Germans invaded through the Low Countries in 1940, passing it to the north. The line, which was supposed to be fully extended further towards the west to avoid such an occurrence, was finally scaled back in response to demands from Belgium. Indeed, Belgium feared it would be sacrificed in the event of another German invasion. The line has since become a metaphor for expensive efforts that offer a false sense of security."

I don't deny some monumental screw up of the French during WWII, but it seems to me that some people here cherry pick the event they need to tell the story they want to tell. It is not fair.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

Fomenko's New Chronology for even bigger morons.


I bet she believes in Tartaria too.

 

[Toots]

Truth be told, the USA didn't lose many military wars. But they lose the political side.
A good example was the Vietnam war, where the US was inflicting massive casualties, compare to their loses.
Even the Tet offensive was a major military failure for the Vietcongs. But the US public opinion about the war, reached a peak because of that.
So a military victory, became a political defeat for the USA.
A similar thing goes for the Iraq and Afghan war. The USA won a military war, but was not able to establish stable political rule in either country.

War is the continuation of politics by other means (to paraphrase the famous Clausewitz saying.)
Thinking that inflicting more casualities equates to winning is why you lost the war.
Not understanding why you were loosing the war was why you lost the war.
Still not understanding 60 years later is why you keep loosing wars.

 

[winjer]

I'm more of a neophyte on the subject than you, but i pretty sure that with ligne Maginot we got screwed first by the belgians who did not let us built it full, and the dumb general (who by the way died in a plane crash in 1941 and was never judged for his actions, not even posthumously, to my knowledge) was just the cherry on top.

"The Maginot Line was impervious to most forms of attack. Consequently, the Germans invaded through the Low Countries in 1940, passing it to the north. The line, which was supposed to be fully extended further towards the west to avoid such an occurrence, was finally scaled back in response to demands from Belgium. Indeed, Belgium feared it would be sacrificed in the event of another German invasion. The line has since become a metaphor for expensive efforts that offer a false sense of security."

I don't deny some monumental screw up of the French during WWII, but it seems to me that some people here cherry pick the event they need to tell the story they want to tell. It is not fair.

The Maginot line was in negotiations to be built with Belgium, but it never was built in time for the war.
Still, there were several Allied armies in Belgium opposing the German advance.
Remember when I talked about "Fall Gelb"? That was the plan to invade France trough Belgium, similarly to what the Germans tried to do with the Schlieffen Plan. But a German plane crashed and the plans were captured by the Allies. So it was scrapped.
The thing is, the Germans knew that the Schlieffen Plan didn't work since 1904, when they did military games and found that they would not reach Paris. Curiously, during WW1, the German lines stopped very close to where the German war games had predicted.
So there is a real possibility that "Fall Gelb" was just a ruse to have the Allies deploy their best units to Belgium. But that is just an hypothesis.

Remember that the breakthrough was not in Belgium, it was at Sedan, in France. Protected by French troops and that had fortifications of the Maginot line.
If you go today to Sedan, you can still see the remains of the Maginot line. And you can still see the graves of some of the French soldiers that died defending it.

One huge error that almost everyone makes when talking about the Maginot line, is that it was supposed to defeat all German advances.
This is incorrect. The French doctrine to building the Maginot line was that it was meant to hold the German army for 30 days. This was the time the French army needed to do a full mobilization.

 

[winjer]

War is the continuation of politics by other means (to paraphrase the famous Clausewitz saying.)
Thinking that inflicting more casualities equates to winning is why you lost the war.
Not understanding why you were loosing the war was why you lost the war.
Still not understanding 60 years later is why you keep loosing wars.

During all these wars, the USA not only inflicted the most casualties, but also the won the most battles.
In military terms, the Vietnam war was being won by the USA. It was only the internal politics that caused the USA to retreat.
Winning a war by getting your opponent tired of killing your people, is not a sound strategy, unless you are ruled by a psychopath communist regime.
And of course, the USA did win the Iraq (both) and Afghan wars. They only failed in creating a political stable government.
You can try to distort things as much as you want, but the USA are excellent at making war. They just really suck at politics.

And by the way, I'm not american.

 

[AudioSlave92210]

Truth be told, the USA didn't lose many military wars. But they lose the political side.
A good example was the Vietnam war, where the US was inflicting massive casualties, compare to their loses.
Even the Tet offensive was a major military failure for the Vietcongs. But the US public opinion about the war, reached a peak because of that.
So a military victory, became a political defeat for the USA.
A similar thing goes for the Iraq and Afghan war. The USA won a military war, but was not able to establish stable political rule in either country.

War is not an objective but a method to achieve its goals. You lose when part of your youth dies for nothing, because the goal was not achieved.

 

[winjer]

War is not an objective but a method to achieve its goals. You lose when part of your youth dies for nothing, because the goal was not achieved.

You continue to ignore that the reason for the defeat on Vietnam was only political, not military.
And that the USA won the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Shifty1897]

Roman Empire currently:

 

[Toots]

During all these wars, the USA not only inflicted the most casualties, but also the won the most battles.
In military terms, the Vietnam war was being won by the USA. It was only the internal politics that caused the USA to retreat.
Winning a war by getting your opponent tired of killing your people, is not a sound strategy, unless you are ruled by a psychopath communist regime.
And of course, the USA did win the Iraq (both) and Afghan wars. They only failed in creating a political stable government.
You can try to distort things as much as you want, but the USA are excellent at making war. They just really suck at politics.

And by the way, I'm not american.

War is a political mean to achieve a goal.
So how can you win a war if you loose the political battle ?

 

[AudioSlave92210]

You continue to ignore that the reason for the defeat on Vietnam was only political, not military.
And that the USA won the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

So why did you wrote 'defeat'?
But I'm ok with you, american military supremacy, more casualities on the other side but what was the gain in the end? You just don't do war for killing people if you're a civilized country. Killing is not an end in itself.

 

[winjer]

War is a political mean to achieve a goal.
So how can you win a war if you loose the political battle ?

So many wars that were not made for any political reasons. Sometimes, it's religious reasons, sometimes money, or land, or just random chance, or a bucket...

But I'll repeat what I said again. The USA are excellent at making war, they just suck at politics.
The comment made was about the joke of France losing wars and surrendering, made by A AudioSlave92210
It was not about the politics of war.
In fact, we could say that France lost WW2 in the military sense. But won in the political sense, because it managed to create political alliances with the USA and Britain.

 

[Toots]

Remember that the breakthrough was not in Belgium, it was at Sedan, in France

Sedan is a city on the french-belgian border, so if germans attacked from there, surely someone has to let them in don't you think ?

 

[winjer]

So why did you wrote 'defeat'?
But I'm ok with you, american military supremacy, more casualities on the other side but what was the gain in the end? You just don't do war for killing people if you're a civilized country. Killing is not an end in itself.

In this case of the Vietnam war, it was set in the Cold War. Capitalism and Democracy VS Communist and Authoritarianism.
The USA didn't go into that war just for killing. It was also protecting the south Vietnam government, though this was not a good idea considering it was very corrupt.

 

[winjer]

Sedan is a city on the french-belgian border, so if germans attacked from there, surely someone has to let them in don't you think ?

There was a Maginot line and French armies there. The second French Army was right there. And to the north, there was the French first army.
That are was protected, but incompetence from the general French staff doomed all of France.

 

[Toots]

So many wars that were not made for any political reasons. Sometimes, it's religious reasons, sometimes money, or land, or just random chance, or a bucket...

But I'll repeat what I said again. The USA are excellent at making war, they just suck at politics.
The comment made was about the joke of France losing wars and surrendering, made by A AudioSlave92210
It was not about the politics of war.
In fact, we could say that France lost WW2 in the military sense. But won in the political sense, because it managed to create political alliances with the USA and Britain.

I think something a bit more truthful would be :
"so many war are declared on pretenses , because you cannot always sell your political reason to the people you ask to go get killed for you.
The USA are excellent at fighting, they just suck at winning wars, but they don't care it is just a mean to feed the military-industrial complex."

A great french writer, Anatole France, said it best : "You think you're dying for your country, when you're just dying for industrialists"

There was a Maginot line and French armies there. The second French Army was right there. And to the north, there was the French first army.
That are was protected, but incompetence from the general French staff doomed all of France.

You are not answering my question. Sedan is near the belgian border not the german one.
But i concede without shame you know much more than me about this period, and history in general. In my mind Belgians had really screwed us up by basically letting germans enter France through the backdoor, but it is of course much more complex than that.

 

[winjer]

You are not answering my question. Sedan is near the belgian border not the german one.
But i concede without shame you know much more than me about this period, and history in general. In my mind Belgians had really screwed us up by basically letting germans enter France through the backdoor, but it is of course much more complex than that.

Before the war started, France and Belgium were negotiating the building of an extension of the Maginot line into the Belgium border with Germany.
One thing that France briefly considered, was to just build the Maginot line all the way to the sea, across the Belgium/French line. But this was immediately rejected as it would antagonize French Allies. Not just Belgium.

Like I said, at Sedan, there was the French Second Army. Which had been reinforced with reserve troops. And had Maginot Fortifications, though not fully completed.
If Huntzinger had stayed at Sedan and accepted the offer from the First Army to receive air support, it would have probably held long enough for the French mobilization.
To the North of Sedan there was the French First Army. And in Belgium, there were several of the best allied armies, from France, Britain and Belgium, because they thought the Germans would attack from there, since that was in "Fall Gelb".
The Germans broke through, not because of the Belgians, not even because of the French soldiery. It broke because of incompetent French leadership.

 

[Halo is Back]

This is about as comprehensive and intellectual as the flat earth theory.

 

[Roman Empire]

Roman Empire currently:

What we have to hear these days. What about a thousand years of history we have, huh?

May Caesar have mercy of this poor fool.

 

[22:22:22]

I'm not a smart man.

Don't mean to antagonize at all.

Scriptures can be manipulated as well.

No disrespect.

 

[DeepEnigma]

So (white) colonization is a lie then.

We are done here.

 

[Lionel Richie]

In a sense, it's fake like everything is. We live in a simulation.

 

[22:22:22]

Simulation of what

 

[DeepEnigma]

Who created this sim

 

[22:22:22]

This is about as comprehensive and intellectual as the flat earth theory.

Which version?

 

[22:22:22]

Who created this sim

Yes. Great question.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Yes. Great question.

And for what purpose

 

[22:22:22]

Pls dont ban me.

Can someone explain the added "J" in front of embedded time of constructions.

Valid question.

Didn't even watch psycho TikTok intro

 

[22:22:22]

And for what purpose

Your guess(es) are as valid as mine.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Your guess(es) are as valid as mine.

42

 

[22:22:22]

I'll leave. Don't want to derail to much.