Talk:Free French Forces
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||||||||||||||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
 |
Free French Forces is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France and Monaco on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
 |
||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments, explaining the ratings and/or suggest improvements.) |
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former Countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of now-defunct states. If you would like to participate, visit the project page to join. | ||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). | ||||||
 |
Supported by the Extraordinary Governments task force. | ||||||
|
|||||||
|
WP Former Countries - Things to do:
|
|||||||
Contents |
[edit] Numbers
I'd like to see detailed numbers of FFF per year. For 1940 the text gives ~10,000: , by the end of July that year, only 7,000 people had volunteered to join the Free French forces. The Free French Navy had fifty ships and some 3,600 men operating as an auxiliary force. No numbers are given for 1941 r 1942. 1943 states 100,000 and 1944 400,000 (100,000 Free French soldiers fought in the Allied side in Italy in 1943. By the time of the Normandy Invasion, the Free French forces numbered more than 400,000 people). Those seem like a very rough estimates to me. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:47, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Communists during the liberation of Paris
Should the presence of the French communists in Paris during the liberation be included in the section about De Gaulle and the participation of the FF in Paris' liberation?
- It certainly can be mentioned; however they probably do not count as Free French Forces themselves (FFL), rather as FFI (if affiliated with the central command of the Resistance). This was basically a state of civil war in France, so things might get subtle and blurry. Rama 07:24, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Review of Article
The author of this article tries to paint a picture of a small, outnumbered, yet dedicated cadre of French nationalists, crusading against the overwhelming forces of continental fascism. In the section entitled “Prelude”, he states that even though de Gaulle addressed the French people on June 18th, 1940, urging soldiers and civilians to join the Free French cause, very little support was won. The author continues by describing it as one of the most famous speeches in French history. “Nevertheless, on the 22 June, Petain signed the surrender and became leader of the puppet regime known as Vichy France.” He tries to discredit the decision of Petain, the French President at the time, to surrender by using de Gaulle’s modern-day and historical popularity.
By using this strategy, of using modern popular opinions regarding the Resistance effort combined with negative portrayals of the Vichy government, the author creates an interesting profile of the French people. First, he portrays de Gaulle, the Free French government, and the Free French forces as a vanguard group of patriots who gradually won back the support of the French citizens. On page two of the article, the author states that “despite repeated broadcasts, by the end of July that year (1940), only 7,000 people had volunteered to join the Free French forces.” His use of the word “only” shows the author’s belief that 7,000 volunteers were not nearly as much as the Free French expected. It could also show the author’s opinion that more than 7,000 French citizens should have wanted to prevent the Nazi occupation. I doubt that the latter is true.
Further down the page, the author describes the incidents at Mers El Kebir and Dakar. On July 3, 1940, the British Navy attacked the French fleet at these locations in North Africa to prevent them from falling into the hands of the Germans. The author then writes a very revealing statement. “This caused bitterness and division in France, particularly in the Navy, and discouraged many French soldiers from joining the Free French forces in Britain and elsewhere. Also, the attempt to persuade Vichy French forces in Dakar to join De Gaulle failed.” The author is not trying to blame the unpopularity of the Free French forces on the natural opinions of the French people, but rather effect of outside sources on their actions. In this instance, British military actions against the French fleet are seen as a major volunteer deterrent. On the first page of the article, the author claims that De Gaulle’s “Appeal of June the 18th” was not successful because it “was not widely heard.” He even claims that there were those in the British Cabinet who tried to prevent De Gaulle from making the radio broadcast, without mentioning any of their names.
The French people are portrayed as easily swayed by the actions of opposing governments. For instance after the direct occupation of Vichy France by the Germans in 1942, the author states, “In response, the 60,000-strong Vichy forces in French North Africa…joined the Allied side as the French 19th corps.” This makes them sound like mercenaries; moved to fight not for whoever pays them more but whoever’s ideology and actions they prefer at the time.
This fits in perfectly with the author’s portrayal of De Gaulle and his followers. Throughout the article, he gradually mentions the increased support the Free French forces received. On page two he references the support of French colonies, without giving any concrete examples or motivations for such an action. This is a major question that I feel the author should have addressed. As mentioned earlier, he references the defection of Vichy forces in North Africa. He includes De Gaulle’s negotiations with various Resistance groups still in France, calling for them to create a united resistance. By the year 1944, the author has mapped the rise in popularity of the Free French forces from 7,000 volunteers in 1940 to 400,000. (page 3). He references multiple campaigns in which French troops were involved and fought gallantly. I believe that the author gives too much credit to the actions of various governments in regards to the actions of the French people. He does not include pre-war opinions of the French government at all. There is no attempt to explore underlying French sentiments regarding the war or the Nazi movement overall. The author makes a convincing point that events such as the attacks at Mers El Kebir and Dakar and the Nazi occupation of Vichy France did affect French attitudes towards the Allies and the Axis. I am not convinced, however, that these opinions had the lasting affect on the French psyche that the author expects us to believe.
One must also call the author’s sources into question. There is no section in the article in which he lists he sources, per se. At the bottom, he gives five “external links” to websites on the subject. Two of these websites are personal websites, neither of which have a published author or bibliographical information. One site leads to an article in the National Review, and seems to be very well written and oriented for a more intellectual audience. One of the links does not work anymore! The last link goes to Charles-De-Gaulle.org, a very pro De Gaulle website. This is a very biased source for information, favoring any the side of the Free French. If the author used these websites as sources for his Wikipedia article, the validity and soundness of his methods should be brought into question. unsigned edit by . 128.239.218.34, 20:09 21 March 2006'
- Interesting points. Please improve the article. ...dave souza, talk 21:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- The reviewer appears to be new to Wikipedia, both as work-in-progress and as a concept. This is indicated by a number of spoken and unspoken assumptions in his, rather over-long, solid text, his failure to address the perceived weaknesses by editing the article himself and the anonymity of his review. It is confirmed by his amend log. ;-)
- Look, mate, there was no single author, male or female. A number of editors have contributed, as with all other Wiki articles, so it's unlikely that there's a concerted effort to present a particular point of view (POV): I certainly didn't try. I'm sure that many of us lack the high intellect that you aspire to, but we do our best. If you wish to contribute to the common effort, welcome. If you have some cast-iron, rigorous sources that support a different reading: excellent (that's neither irony nor sarcasm - it's honest), if you wish to re-work this or any other article to improve it, you won't be the first or the last. Just please remember that Wiki seeks to inform, educate but not just to impress.
- It's polite to sign and date your submissions on talk pages - use 4 tildes (on my keyboard it's upper-case #) and it would be even nicer if you acquired a username.
- A couple of comments: I think that you read implied meanings where none exist. For example, as you accept, French military opinion moved when the Germans occupied Vichy. This prompted the switch to the Allies of the French Army in north Africa, although I suspect that their officers (who tended to remain loyal to whatever legitimate political structure existed) didn't "switch" - they reacted to changed circumstances and German revocation of the armistice. Either way, I think your imputation of "mercenaries" is a flawed reading - or perhaps the text should be reworked. (One thing that is missed, I think, is the see-saw influence of the Soviet Union upon the Resistance.) I think that some of your points could rest better in other articles, eg Vichy France. Do you really doubt that Allied/British actions at Mers-el-Kebir (and later in Syria, Madagascar, etc) angered French Naval commanders? Hundreds of French seamen died! Britain had been an Ally! The effect must have been to sour and dissuade French fighters from abandoning France and sticking with the fight! Of course one is influenced by external factors!! I am, aren't you? Enough, I'm getting as verbose as you! RSVP Folks at 137 22:34, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for that informed comment. I've left a welcome at User talk:128.239.218.34. So far the anon appears to have only made this one edit. ..dave souza, talk 19:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Africans and Polynesians
With all these African and Polynesian colonies joining the war what portion of the Free French forces were non-French? Also, were any promises made to the colonies to gain support? Were any major independence leaders of the decolonization period part of the Free French Forces? Finally, did the experience of fighting in the Free French forces alter race relations (I had a class which talked about how battlefield bonding and exposure to soldiers who didn't care about maintaining colonial relations undermined colonial rule in the Pacific, so there's something)? I'm not an expert and so I'm not really sure about the answers (though I'm sure a large chunk of the Free French forces were African so I'll throw that into the article, though it would be nice to have a number or general figure), but these are important questions for this article Jztinfinity 02:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Free French Expeditionary Corps / Italy 1944
I am working on the article for the Battles of Monte Cassino and I'm trying to work out how the French Expeditionary Corps under General Alphonse Juin (consisting of 4 Divisions plus 12,000 Moroccan goumiers), which had a key role in the final battle, fits in with this article which makes no mention of the French exploits in Italy. Can anyone help? Stephen Kirrage 10:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I guess I saw an archive video of the Nouvelle Armée Française (New French Army) equipped with US-built material in the campaign of Italy in INA.fr National Audiovisual Institute. You'd better check in! I can't do it myself i'm currently involved in a database. i'll add public domain FFL pictures later.
The campaign of Italy must be spoken in this article as well a list of all colonies who joined de Gaulle (inc. French Algeria) as well of those who were loyal to the Vichy government (French Indochina: the isolated garrison was attacked by the Japanese, very few are aware of this fact).
What strikes me is the English called their colonies (AU/NZ/South Africa) to join the battle in 1940 while the French did not though they had colonies all over the world. I think this was a political/strategical mistake. Shame On You 05:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Stephen see, if you haven't already, Goumier.
- Shame, you are right in that British Commonwealth troops were initially intended to go to France. But it had fallen before any of the Commonwealth troops got there. One Canadian division was landed and withdrawn almost the same day. I guess France's North Africans weren't too far away and colonial troops certainly fought hard for the Vichy regime in Syria and Madagascar in 1941 and 1942. Maybe there were training issues, etc. Grant65 | Talk 02:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- THE CAMPAIGN OF ITALY, found this: C.E.F. Corps Expéditionnaire Français (French Expeditionary Corps aka French Task Force)
- Leader: General Alphonse Juin
- CEF Units (colonies fighters: indigenous+colons):
- november 1943
- 2nd division of Moroccan infantry (General Dody)
- 3rd division of Algerian infantry (General of Monsabert)
- april 1944 (reinforcements)
- 4th Moroccan mountain division (General Sevez)
- 1st free French division (General Brosset)
- other troops in CEF:
- 3 Moroccan groups of Tabors (General Guillaume)
(source: http://www.gers.pref.gouv.fr/acvg/documents/4244ang.htm) Shame On You 18:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] fighting units
- FFF fighting units from France-Libre.net (FFF foundation)
- FFF reports & docs bis
Shame On You 17:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] French SAS
the French SAS squadron was created in 1941 and led by Captain Georges Bergé. SAS fought in Africa with the British then in Crete and Lybia. source: http://www.france-libre.net/forces_francaises_libres/1_1_6_2_SAS_creation_Special_Air_Service.htm Shame On You 17:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] public domain docs
- main page (all wars involved with the Gers province)
- WWII docs (texts available in english) same source, PD
- Fights of the the population in Gers in the regular army from Nov.8, 1942 to Aug.31, 1944 (1992- O.N.A.C.- S.D. GERS translated in English) same source, great info about campaigns.
Shame On You 17:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] colonial troops in may-june 40
actually i've watched video news archives by the french army (SCA Cinematographic Service of the French Army) "Journal de Guerre" (War Diary) N°33 up to N°36, and i can testify there were "indigenous" (indigènes) fighters in the battle of france. i've seen them in action, black men, algerians and morrocans! by the way several footages from Journal de guerre #33 were used Frank Capra's Divide and Conquer. i wish i could create screenshots to illustrate the campaign of belgium, luxembourg and france where fought the french. unfortunately it seems that unlike the us war ministry material, french war material are not public domain. i've asked other others to know we could do. Shame On You 13:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] template map
The template map is very, very wrong. It cites only the metropolitan territory, over which the FFL only had effective juridiction in the last stages of the war. And it completely fails to mention
- Western Africa (Dakar, the Fleet, the people and infrastructures)
- North Africa (the Mediteranean, Oran, Alger...)
- New Caledonia (used as base against the Japanese)
- St Pierre and Miquelon
- Territories in the Carabean
Also, stating "London" as de facto capital is awfully simplistic: a great deal of the operations were decided from Algiers. Rama 10:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Big Confusion
I am sory to see that you confuse Free French Forces and the French Army.
Free French Forces finish at the end of july 1943 when the too french armys in north Africa have been reunified.
And many people that you call "Free french" should not think that it's an honor.
No, Marcel Marceau, Jean de Lattre de Tassigny, Jean Monnet, Jean René Champion (who's this one ?) and Antoine de Saint-Exupéry where realy not Free French
(but my father was a real one) Jacques Ghémard —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.248.222.253 (talk) 15:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC).
- Feel free to correct the article, providing appropriate references, or suggest improvements. Rama 18:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ok man, you will corect my poor english Jacques Ghémard 17:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Categories: B-Class military history articles needing review | B-Class French military history articles | French military history task force articles | B-Class World War II articles | World War II task force articles | B-Class military history articles | B-Class France articles | Low-importance France articles | Extraordinary Governments task force articles | Start-Class former country articles
