Bonsoir
About the sources: Storia Illustrata July 1981 and April 1985.
About the whole matter I'm afraid the coming answer of mine will be going to hurt someone. Sorry, but I believe a true opinion, even if colliding with an other one, is better than a wily silent or a mendacious declaration.
The French problem was (and is) not the campaign fought in May and June 1940. That was only a defeat (not the first and not the last) of a many century old state and people in a planet where any country suffered, sometimes, such an accident from Troy to Japan and USSR.
The real tragedy is the activity of some French spaking people who state for example (as this is the spirit of such debauched answers like the one quoting "royal dédomaggement") sentences whose meaning is, more or less, the following one: the French who died under the Anglosaxon bombs were about 60.000, but they were proud to die in such a way as their heart was with the Allies. Not different is to say that the raids over the French towns and the neutral ones were, of course, a pity, but however the RAF commanders and the British aircrew' sentiment were pure as they were sorry to drop those bombs (while the DCA, like the French one, was formed only by villains who had the bad taste to obey at the orders, to defend their homes and factories and, moreover, to have a damned good aim). When they would be back home probably they would not drink a beer at the mess, but only a cup of tea sobbing about this sale besogne.
Not different is the attitude of people stating the British were right to sink the French men-of-war and the merchant ships they were escorting as the matelots of the Royale were guilty to supply their homeland of about an half of the food she needed in 1940-1942 for a more or less decent diet facing the British blockade. Anyone knows, in fact, any true French parent was happy to see his sons starving as he believed, of course, that the victory of Britain would be granted by his family disappearance. And if the whole country had lost his population so much the better, as that historical mistake of the One hundred years war would so be corrected uniting, at least, France to Britain under only one sovereign. To the hell Jeanne d'Arc and the French culture: what mattered was only British happiness and comfort, of course. It was only a pity that not all the French had the opportunity to jump on a RAF plane leaving for Britain; unfortunatly there was not place for 40 millions of citizens, but only for a just appointed general.
According my opinion this greediness of meanness is simply a disgusting one.
A great historian, a friend of France and her culture and my tutor, Franco Bandini, whose books were translated in France too, wrote, many years ago that: "...The French drame was not the defeat or the collaboration. It's in the human weakness not to win forever and even to bent. The real tragedy was the endeavour, in 1945, to try to persuade themselves that these accidents never happened and that all the people, except for some hundreds of intellectuels, were the winners any day during all the conflict".
I know these could be harsh words for the most pro Allied jingoist among the Forum members (and the Lord know there ane many indeed) and I'm ready to face any consequence in this community, but these are the facts, Gentlemen, everything else is propaganda and of the worste type.
EC
Se Connecter | 
M’enregistrer | Bienvenue sur le Forum, chère Visiteuse, cher Visiteur. - Nous sommes le 16 Avr 2024, 21:33
 |
: j'ai entendu par ler d'un bombardement d'une ville suisse tel que Bâle ou autre ville frontalière avec la france, comme "avertissements" à la Suisse pour ce qui est des relations avec le IIIe Reich. C'était en 1944, je ne pourrait vous en dire plus. Quelqu'un en sait-il justement un peu plus ?
de 
dans: 
Le
Forum sur facebook
Le
Forum sur twitter
Histomag sur facebook