The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

The French are military failures.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/1/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,001 times Debate No: 7631
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)




In my opinion the French basically military failures. Out of the many wars they have been in they did not do so well. The only memorable French Victories - The 100 Years war, which the French went to a women for aid, who they later sentenced to heresy. The French Revolution, which the French had to win.

Also there has never been very good French leaders.

The only two were Charlemagne and Napoleon, and Napoleon was a Corsican who took over France and used the military of all the countries he took over meaning a non-French military.

Now here is a very specific list of French military falters/defeats.

- Gallic Wars
- Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian. [Or at the time in history, a Roman -ed.]

- Hundred Years War
- Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman." Sainted.

- Italian Wars
- Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians.

- Wars of Religion
- France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots

- Thirty Years War
- France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

- War of Revolution
- Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

- The Dutch War
- Tied

- War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War
- Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power.

- War of the Spanish Succession
- Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since.

- American Revolution
- In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when America does most of the fighting."

- French Revolution
- Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.

- The Napoleonic Wars
- Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

- The Franco-Prussian War
- Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

- World War I
- Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States [Entering the war late -ed.]. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

- World War II
- Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

- War in Indochina
- Lost. French forces plead sickness; take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu

- Algerian Rebellion
- Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; "We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.

- War on Terrorism
- France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's.

The question for any country silly enough to count on the French should not be "Can we count on the French?", but rather "How long until France collapses?"

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. All you do is leave behind a lot of noisy baggage."

Or, better still, the quote from last week's Wall Street Journal: "They're there when they need you."

With only an hour and a half of research, Jonathan Duczkowski provided the following losses:

Norse invasions, 841-911.
After having their way with the French for 70 years, the Norse are bribed by a French King named Charles the Simple (really!) who gave them Normandy in return for peace. Normans proceed to become just about the only positive military bonus in France's [favour] for next 500 years.

Andrew Ouellette posts this in response:

1066 A.D. William The Conquerer Duke and Ruler of France Launches the Largest Invasion in the history of the world no other was as large until the same trip was taken in reverse on June 6th 1944 William Fights Harold for the Throne of England Which old king Edward rightfully left to William but Harold Usurped the throne Will fights the Saxons (English)wins and the French Rule England for the Next 80 Years. then the French start the largest building and economic infrastructure since the fall of the Roman Empire the Norman Economy skyrockets and the Normans inadvertantly start England to become a major world Power Vive La France-

Matt Davis posts this in response to Andrew Ouellette above:

Oh dear. We seem to have overlooked some basic facts. Firstly, Philip the First (1060 - 1108) was King of France at the time of the Norman invasion of 1066 - William was Duke of Normandy and, incidentally, directly descended from the Vikings. William was, therefore, as alien to France as the experience of victory. Since Philip did not invade England, the victory at Hastings was Norman - not French. Normandy may be a part of France now but it most certainly wasn't in 1066. Therefore, William's coronation as King of England had nothing whatsoever to do with the French. As usual, they were nowhere near the place when the fighting was going on. The mistaken belief that 1066 was a French victory leads to the Third Rule of French Warfare; "When incapable of any victory whatsoever - claim someone else's".

Mexico, 1863-1864.
France attempts to take advantage of Mexico's weakness following its thorough thrashing by the U.S. 20 years earlier ("Halls of Montezuma"). Not surprisingly, the only unit to distinguish itself is the French Foreign Legion (consisting of, by definition, non-Frenchmen). Booted out of the country a little over a year after arrival.

Panama jungles 1881-1890.
No one but nature to fight, France still loses; canal is eventually built by the U.S. 1904-1914.

Napoleonic Wars.
Should be noted that the Grand Armee was largely (~%50) composed of non-Frenchmen after 1804 or so. Mainly disgruntled minorities and anti-monarchists. Not surprisingly, these performed better than the French on many occasions.

Haiti, 1791-1804.
French defeated by rebellion after sacrificing 4,000 Poles to yellow fever. Shows another rule of French warfare; when in doubt, send an ally.

India, 1673-1813.
British were far more charming than French, ended up victors. Therefore the British are well known for their tea, and the French for their whine (er, wine...). Ensures 200 years of bad teeth in England.

Barbary Wars, middle ages-1830.
Pirates in North Africa continually harass European shipping in Meditteranean. France's solution: pay them to leave us alone. America's solution: kick their asses ("the Shores of Tripoli"). [America's] first overseas victories, won 1801-1815.

1798-1801, Quasi-War with U.S.
French privateers (semi-legal pirates) attack U.S. shipping. U.S. fights France at sea for 3 years; French eventually cave; sets precedent for next 200 years of Franco-American relations.

Moors in Spain, late 700s-early 800s.
Even with Charlemagne leading them against an enemy living in a hostile land, French are unable to make much progress. Hide behind Pyrennes until the modern day.

French-on-French losses (probably should be counted as victories too, just to be


Before I will proceed to my arguments, let me rebut some fallacies that had come out from the mouth of the previous speaker.
1. "In my opinion" Your opinion is not the opinions of all people. Making your opinion as a basis in this debate is a futile. Meaning your opinion is unreliable, except if you are an expert in that field.
2. You are having a time based debate because you are making examples of Charles Martel and other French LEADERS in the past which is not applicable in this debate and you are also including the past WARS with the connection of the FRENCH.
Let me proceed to my arguments:

1. FRANCEis not a military-concentrating country instead they are more on new trends like FASHIONS.
- so in this kind of manner, FRANCE as a country will remain as FRANCE known to the world as one of the FASHION updated country and not a REBELLIOUS country like IRAQ who is not having its development at all.. If FRANCE will be defeated in the war, it is okay to the eyes of the other people in the world because they know FRANCE is not a military country.
Debate Round No. 1


IBelieve forfeited this round.


kogarasumaro143 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


IBelieve forfeited this round.


kogarasumaro143 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
Check this out ---> (Who said I'm being mean to CON?)
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
CON has so far not properly negated PRO's argument, therefore, PRO is wining.
Posted by kogarasumaro143 7 years ago
yes it is... why do you say so???
Posted by rageAgainstTheDebate 7 years ago
France is still a country?
Posted by wpfairbanks 7 years ago
haha, oh man, this is harsh. A tad false, and true. Some of your wars are a bit skewed. Like the American Revolution, and the French revolution. In the FR, they waged war on all of Europe and did do quite well. Domestically Robespierre messed things up quite badly, you so it goes. You leave out the French Resitiance, which was pretty cool.

I do think however, that their contributions to art, literature, philosophy, the social sciences, the physical sciences, and soccer (like the best team in the world), do exuse them a bit from being bad fighters. Of course, Germany could make the same arguement...
Posted by feverish 7 years ago
That's well funny John.

IBelieve, please credit your sources:

I noticed another debate on here that stirred up some controversy about plagiarism, you better be carefull.

Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 7 years ago
France haz military?
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
This should be a good debate
No votes have been placed for this debate.