QA问答：为什么法国在普法战争、第一次世界大战和第二次世界大战等战争中表现如此糟糕？
正文翻译
Philippe Prigent Lawyer (2013–present)
菲利普·普里让 律师（2013年至今）
1. France was extremely good in WW1. The Franco-German front was the hardest one and French units were dispatched to support weaker fronts, such as North Italy. France formed the bulk of Entente divisions and the war was won by French tanks and planes (the Germans remembered the lesson vividly and used the same weapons in WW2).
2. The so-called Franco-Prussian war was actually a Franco-German war, since all German states fought alongside Prussia. The issue here is numbers: the German army was twice as numerous because (a) France had a more professional army, without massive recruits, and (b) Germany was and by the way still is more populated than France. Some French generals hoped that French soldiers could still defeat their German counterparts even when outnumbered 1 to 2 (as during the Napoleonic wars), but it did not work because French soldiers and German soldiers are equal in quality.
1. 法国在第一次世界大战中的表现非常出色。法德战线是最艰难的战线，法国部队还被派往支援像意大利北部这样较弱的战线。法国是协约国部队的主力，而且这场战争的胜利要归功于法国的坦克和飞机（德国人清楚地吸取了这个教训，并在第二次世界大战中使用了同样的武器）。
2. 所谓的普法战争实际上是一场法德战争，因为当时所有德意志邦国都与普鲁士并肩作战。问题关键在于数量：德国军队的人数是法国的两倍，原因有二：（a）法国拥有一支更职业化的军队，没有大规模征兵；（b）德国当时的人口就比法国多，而且至今依然如此。一些法国将军希望法国士兵即便在兵力1比2处于劣势的情况下（就像拿破仑战争时期那样），仍能击败德国士兵，但这并没有奏效，因为法德两国士兵的素质不相上下。
3. During WW2, Germany had superior numbers (about 3.4 million soldiers v. 3.1 million Allied soldiers, and France had scrapped the barrel). WW2 was a mechanized war, in which movements are much faster (planes and tanks move much more quickly than footmen). Germany made a 500 km deep breakthrough thanks to mechanized units and the battle was over because France had basically no room left to create a second line and a good part of its army had been encircled.
4. By the way, during all the xiXth century and up to 1945 included, German commanders used to explain that French soldiers were the best apart from German soldiers. See e.g. Guderian, von Manstein, Rommel, Kesselring, Clausewitz, Hitler, etc.
3. 第二次世界大战期间，德国在兵力上占据优势（约340万士兵，而协约国士兵为310万，且法国已经竭尽全力征兵）。二战是一场机械化战争，部队机动速度快得多（飞机和坦克的移动速度远快于步兵）。凭借机械化部队，德国实现了500公里纵深的突破，战役就此结束，因为法国基本上已没有空间组建第二道防线，而且其很大一部分军队已经被包围。
4. 顺便提一句，在整个19世纪直至1945年（含1945年）期间，德国指挥官们常常表示，除了德国士兵之外，法国士兵是最优秀的。例如古德里安、冯·曼施坦因、隆美尔、凯塞林、克劳塞维茨、希特勒等人（都持此观点）。
Tanner Caillouet Just an avid reader and student of history.
坦纳·凯卢埃 历史爱好者及研究者
What do you mean Bad in war? The French have the most stellar military record of any modern nation. Going back hundreds of years the French have won more battles and wars than they have lost. Why would they still Exist as a people if this were not the case?
(Franco-prussian war is outside my expertise)
“在战争中表现糟糕”是什么意思？在所有现代国家中，法国拥有最辉煌的军事记录。回溯数百年历史，法国赢得的战役和战争比输掉的要多。如果情况并非如此，这个民族怎么可能存续至今？
（普法战争不在我的专业研究范围内）
WWI: The french fought incredibly well in the face of an overwhelming foe. A numerically superior one at that. Germany caused MASSIVE casualties in the first days of the war for the french as the French went to war the same way they did in the 1870s and 1800s. In bright Red trousers and Bright Blue coats. If you have ever wanted to know what a French Cuirassier looked like in the Napoleonic Period, go look at pictures of the first days of WWI in France. I shit you not, Full on Plate armor and Swords against machine guns and modern Artillery.
第一次世界大战：面对势不可挡的敌人，法国人的表现极为出色，而且敌人在兵力上还占据优势。战争初期，德国给法国造成了巨大伤亡，因为法国参战的方式与19世纪70年代和19世纪时如出一辙——士兵穿着鲜红色长裤和亮蓝色外套。如果你想知道拿破仑时期法国胸甲骑兵的模样，去看看第一次世界大战初期法国战场上的照片就知道了。我没开玩笑，他们身着全套板甲、手持长剑，去对抗机关枪和现代化火炮。
They just went to war as they always did, Marching in the open and in formation. They didn't know any better (or refused to change) and suffered as a result. They Adopted a more defensive posture and changed uniforms to the dull blue they were known for in both wars. These tactics really didn't change until 1918 when the war became more fluid. If you would like to learn more about WWI there is a series on Youtube called The Great War. In it Indie (the host) takes you through exactly what happened week by week 100 years ago. Many additional specials and on-battlefield sets including Verdun and a little place called Przemysl Fortress. Specials include the Weapons used in the war, down to equipment and uniforms, Grand Strategies of each nation and individual tactical Doctrines. All presented in the most wonderful format of a news cast covering the conflict as if it were happening today. It really sheds a new light on the war as you look at it as it happened rather than as a whole.
他们只是一如既往地投入战争，在开阔地带列队行进。他们要么是不懂更好的作战方式（要么就是拒绝改变），结果因此遭受重创。之后，他们采取了更偏向防御的姿态，并将制服换成了在这两场战争中为人熟知的暗蓝色。这种战术一直到1918年战争局势变得更具流动性时才真正改变。如果你想了解更多关于第一次世界大战的内容，YouTube上有一个名为《The Great War》（《伟大的战争》）的系列纪录片。主持人英迪会带你详细回顾100年前每周发生的事情，还有许多额外的专题内容和战场实景拍摄，包括凡尔登战役和一个名为普热梅希尔要塞的地方。专题内容涵盖了战争中使用的武器（细到装备和制服）、各国的总体战略以及具体的战术原则，所有内容都以新闻播报的绝佳形式呈现，仿佛这场冲突就发生在当下。当你按照事件发生的顺序而非从整体去看待这场战争时，它确实能让你对战争有全新的认识。
WWII: In the second World war it purely came down to tactics. While the French and English were relatively evenly match against the Germans, both sides had very different plans for the war. The English and French had envisioned another WWI. With both sides slugging it out in the trenches again. Meanwhile, the Germans had every intention to avoid that outcome and smash the other side as quickly as possible. Thus, the Blitzkrieg. Another deciding factor was how either side dispersed their tanks.
The English and French saw the Tank PURELY as an Infantry support vehicle or bunker buster. They dispersed their tanks in very small groups in Infantry regiments.
The Germans knew the real power of the Tank and created Entire Panzer divisions designed to concentrate and smash through a small part of the Front line then drive on into the support areas in the rear while Infantry (and Mechanized Infantry), attached to the panzer division would secure what the Panzers passed by.
This enabled the Germans to steamroll small groups of French and English tanks (during the invasion.) This also prevented the Allies from forming a well organized counter to the Panzer Division.
第二次世界大战：在二战中，（法国的失利）纯粹是战术层面的问题。尽管法国和英国在兵力上与德国相对势均力敌，但双方的作战计划却截然不同。英法两国预想的是又一场类似一战的战争，双方会再次在战壕里浴血奋战。与此同时，德国却一心想要避免这种结果，力求尽快击溃对方，于是“闪电战”应运而生。另一个决定性因素是双方部署坦克的方式。
英法两国仅将坦克视为步兵支援车辆或碉堡摧毁武器，他们将坦克以非常小的规模分散部署在步兵团中。
而德国人深知坦克的真正威力，他们组建了完整的装甲师，其设计用途就是集中力量突破前线的某个薄弱环节，然后向后方的支援区域推进，同时隶属于装甲师的步兵（和机械化步兵）会巩固坦克部队经过的区域。
这使得德国人在入侵期间能够轻松击溃英法两国的小规模坦克部队，也让协约国无法组织起有效的防御来对抗德国装甲师。
James Coyne Screenwriter (2008–present) Upvoted by Christian Desaix, PhD History, Louisiana State University
詹姆斯·科因 编剧（2008年至今） 获路易斯安那州立大学历史学博士克里斯蒂安·德赛克斯点赞
N.B. I have upxed this answer after doing some more research, thanks to Eric Lalouette for pushing me to look deeper.
At the head, let me first say that you are proceeding from a flawed assumption. The French in WW1 fought magnificently. Unlike the Germans, the French and British governments were democratic, and the people did not want war, and both those countries entered the first world war with much less prepared troops than their enemies.
注：经过进一步研究，我对这个回答进行了更新，感谢埃里克·拉卢埃特促使我更深入地探究（相关历史）。
首先，我想说的是，你的提问基于一个错误的假设。法国在第一次世界大战中的表现极为出色。与德国不同，法国和英国是民主国家，两国人民都不希望发生战争，而且这两个国家参战之时，军队的准备程度远不如他们的敌人。
But, looking at the Franco-Prussian war, I think the basic issue was one of preparedness and equipment. The French were in the middle of a re-organization effort. Their main armies were undermanned, and their reserves were heavily undertrained and were often unruly conscxts according to data from the era. The Germans had a long history of conscxtion, a new wave of nationalism, and a deeply professional general staff that organized their troops far more effectively that the French. Add to this the new krupps field gun. It was a breech loading artillery piece, the French still used muzzle loading artillery. The Germans could shell the french from further away, more accurately and at a greater range of fire. This played havoc with the French, and was a taste of the way wars would be fought for the next 50 years.
The French learned their lessons well, and by the First World War, had a strong general staff, excellent artillery and until their manpower was nearly exhausted and on the verge of mutiny, they fought very well, stopping the Germans on several key occasions and saving themselves from ruin. The cost those brave Frenchmen paid would come back to haunt them a generation later.
但从普法战争来看，我认为根本问题在于准备情况和装备水平。当时法国正处于军队重组阶段，主力部队兵力不足，而且根据当时的数据记载，其预备役部队训练严重不足，士兵多为不服管教的应征者。德国则有着悠久的征兵历史，当时还掀起了新的民族主义浪潮，并且拥有高度专业化的总参谋部，部队组织效率远高于法国。此外，德国还拥有新型克虏伯野战炮，这种火炮采用后膛装填方式，而法国仍在使用前膛装填火炮。德国人能够在更远的距离上对法国军队进行炮击，不仅精度更高，射程也更广。这给法国军队造成了极大混乱，也预示了未来50年战争的作战模式。
法国很好地吸取了教训，到第一次世界大战时，已经拥有了强大的总参谋部和精良的火炮装备。在兵力几乎耗尽、士兵濒临哗变之前，法国军队的表现一直非常出色，多次在关键战役中阻挡了德军的进攻，使国家免于覆灭。然而，这些勇敢的法国人所付出的代价，在一代人之后给他们带来了困扰。
Victory proved a dangerous thing for the French in the interwar years. They tended to take the wrong lessons from the conflict, and because they took a naturally defensive position made some critical errors. In tank design, the French thought of their tanks as mobile fortresses, designing huge, powerful, but slow and limited range machines like the Char 1bis. The famous Maginot Line was unbreakable but incomplete. Some historians also point to the sense of false security the line engendered in French society, leaving them unprepared, as a society and military, for the reality of the total war to come. As a concept in the mid 20’s it took years to finance and build, but the time the first casements come on line, there is an argument to be made that it was already obsolete. Obsolete or not, the Germans avoided it totally, and when they did run into it, the line did it’s job well. It was a huge investment by the French Government, one that backfired in many ways.
在两次世界大战之间的时期，胜利对法国而言反而成了一件危险的事。他们往往从之前的战争中吸取了错误的经验教训，而且由于本能地采取防御姿态，犯了一些关键性错误。在坦克设计方面，法国将坦克视为移动的堡垒，设计出像Char 1bis（夏尔1bis）那样体积庞大、火力强劲但速度缓慢且续航能力有限的坦克。著名的马奇诺防线坚不可摧，却并不完整。一些历史学家还指出，这条防线在法国社会中催生了虚假的安全感，使得法国无论是社会层面还是军事层面，都对即将到来的全面战争缺乏准备。马奇诺防线作为20世纪20年代提出的概念，其融资和建造耗时多年，但当第一批防御工事投入使用时，有观点认为它已经过时了。无论是否过时，德国人完全避开了这条防线，而当他们确实遭遇防线时，防线也起到了应有的防御作用。这是法国政府的一项巨额投资，却在多个方面产生了适得其反的效果。
Another key component of the French defeat in 1940 is that her military just wasn’t what it had been in generations past. Expectations from her allies were reliant on her example from the first war, but France was a shell of her proud pre-1914-self in 1940. Consistent failure by the US, and the UK to maintain the Versailles Agreement had broken the safety restraints the French were relying on for their national safety. They were massively unprepared for war in 1939.
1940年法国战败的另一个关键因素是，其军队已不复往日雄风。盟国对法国的期望基于它在第一次世界大战中的表现，但1940年的法国早已不是1914年之前那个令人自豪的强国了。美国和英国一直未能维护《凡尔赛和约》的效力，这打破了法国赖以保障国家安全的制约机制，导致法国在1939年时对战争毫无准备。
By far, in my humble opinion, the biggest mistake that the French made was a failure to upgrade their communication systems between the wars. The Germans had radios in their tanks, had field communications that integrated their armies efficiently and worked as what militaries today call a ‘force multiplier’. The French used motorcycle messengers. They reacted at speeds acceptable in the first war, but wholly behind the curve in 1940. Their nearly paranoid refusal to work with their allies resulted in the disastrous miscommunication between the French and British troops, making it all too easy to drive between them and crucially for the French, get behind the main body of troops and encircle them.
在我看来，到目前为止，法国在两次世界大战之间犯下的最大错误是未能升级其通信系统。德国的坦克配备了无线电设备，其野外通信系统能高效地整合各支部队，起到了如今军方所说的“力量倍增器”的作用。而法国则依靠摩托车信使传递信息，这种反应速度在第一次世界大战中尚可接受，但在1940年已经远远落后于时代。此外，法国近乎偏执地拒绝与盟国合作，导致法英军队之间出现了严重的沟通失误，这使得德军很容易在两国军队之间撕开缺口，而对法国而言至关重要的是，德军得以绕到其主力部队后方并将其包围。
Here, the lessons of World War 1 really came back to haunt the Allies. The French government, all of them veterans of, survivors of, and witnesses to the carnage of the First World War did not have the stomach for another national blood letting. They had lost 1.1 million men in combat in the first war. For a sense of comparison, thats more deaths than the United States has seen in every war of the 20th century, combined.
That said, the units of French soldiers who fought in the line at Dunkirk, who evacuated and trained and fought with the allies in Africa, Sicily, and to liberate their homeland 5 years later, were some of the bravest men to fight in the Second World War.
We like to joke about French rifles (dropped once, never fired) or French tanks (5 gears, 1 forward, 4 in reverse) - but in realty, the French Fighting Man was, and always has been, the equal of any on the battlefield.
在此，第一次世界大战的教训确实给协约国带来了困扰。法国政府的成员要么是第一次世界大战的老兵、幸存者，要么是那场大屠杀的目击者，他们无法承受再一次的国家流血牺牲。法国在第一次世界大战的战斗中损失了110万人，相比之下，这个数字超过了美国在20世纪所有战争中死亡人数的总和。
尽管如此，在敦刻尔克前线作战、随后撤离并接受训练，之后又在非洲、西西里岛与盟国并肩作战，且在5年后参与解放祖国的法国士兵部队，是第二次世界大战中最勇敢的战斗群体之一。
我们总喜欢拿法国步枪（扔下一次，从未开过火）或法国坦克（5个档位，1个前进档，4个倒档）开玩笑，但事实上，法国士兵过去是、现在依然是战场上与任何士兵都不相上下的优秀战士。
Anthony Ames IT Contractor at Charles Schwab (2018–present)
安东尼·埃姆斯 嘉信理财公司信息技术承包商（2018年至今）
Well, in 1870 the French had clueless leaders in whom no one had any faith, and a debacle ensued. Among other things, Napoleon III grossly underestimated Prussia's ability to unify and rally Germany.
The French actually did quite well in 1914-18, considering they were up against the nastiest military machine on earth. Unfortunately, in winning they lost 20% of their young men, including many of their best potential leaders. These frightful losses cut the birth rate and drove the French into a kind of collective nervous breakdown after WWI.
So in 1940 the French were beset with a shortage of men, mediocre leadership, miserable morale, and a raging dispute between Left and Right over who was responsible for the mess. They were simply in no shape to face Germany again.
1870年时，法国的领导人昏庸无能，无人信服，一场惨败随之而来。其中，拿破仑三世严重低估了普鲁士统一和团结德国的能力。
考虑到法国在1914至1918年期间对抗的是当时世界上最凶狠的军事机器，他们的实际表现相当不错。不幸的是，虽然取得了胜利，法国却损失了20%的青年男性，其中包括许多极具潜力的未来领袖。这些惨重的损失导致法国出生率下降，并在一战后使法国陷入了一种集体性的精神崩溃状态。
因此，1940年的法国面临着兵员短缺、领导层平庸、士气低落的问题，而且左右两派还在激烈争论谁该为这一混乱局面负责。他们根本没有能力再次对抗德国。
Neil K. MacMillan Freelance writer specializing in historical subjects and criminal history.
尼尔·K·麦克米伦 专攻历史题材和犯罪史的自由撰稿人
Where do you get the idea the French were bad in all three of those wars? Yes France lost the Franco-Prussian War. They were out generaled by Von Moltke and the Prussians. France basically lost a generation of young men in World War One, but they handled themselves as well as any of the other combatants and better than some. It is easy to cast aspersions, but the majority of fighting on the Western Front took place in France and Belgium. I respectfully disagree with your assertion they were "bad" in the First World War. In the Second World War their problem was leadership. The average soldier was brave and well trained, but were poorly served by their leaders. And, let's face it, in 1940, the Germans were much better at tank warfare and integrated arms than most of the allied nations were. The Allies got better at it and didn't have to contend with their political leaders interfering with their military commanders by the way, Charles De Gaulle was actually one of the better French generals in WWII and handled his command quite competently during the French campaign of 1940.
你从哪里得出法国在这三场战争中表现都很糟糕的结论？诚然，法国输掉了普法战争，因为他们的将领在指挥上不及冯·毛奇和普鲁士人。在第一次世界大战中，法国基本上损失了一代人的青年男性，但他们的表现并不逊色于其他参战国，甚至比有些国家还要好。说三道四很容易，但西线的大部分战斗都发生在法国和比利时境内。我不认同你关于法国在第一次世界大战中“表现糟糕”的说法。在第二次世界大战中，法国的问题出在领导层。普通士兵勇敢且训练有素，却未能得到领导层的良好指挥。而且，说实话，1940年时，德国在坦克作战和诸军兵种协同作战方面的能力远超大多数协约国。后来协约国在这方面的能力有所提升，而且不必应对政治领导人对军事指挥官的干预。顺便提一句，夏尔·戴高乐实际上是二战中法国较为优秀的将领之一，在1940年的法国战役中，他对所部的指挥相当出色。
Orlando Barrios Cashier at Super-Duper Mart
奥兰多·巴里奥斯 超级超市收银员
1870: Nappy III over-reacted to a silly, snotty telegram, together with an irresponsible, hysterical press. They fought for wounded pride, not for a real grievance. The French Army was ordered to hole themselves up in their fortresses, instead of taking the initiative. Lions led by donkeys.
1914: they fought on, and fought on despite losing much of their industry, against a numerically and industrially stronger enemy. So… no, they were not bad in this one, au contraire! What are you talking about?
1940: nobody wanted another slaughter, so they were as ready as they could be… to fight the last war. De Gaulle and others, who preached a mechanized form of warfare, were ignored. Then the Third Republic panicked and ordered an ignominious surrender. Lions led by old, tired, fearful donkeys.
1870年：拿破仑三世对一封愚蠢无礼的电报反应过度，再加上媒体不负责任的狂热报道，法国为了受损的尊严而非真正的冤屈发动了战争。法国军队接到的命令是固守堡垒，而非主动出击，这可谓是“雄狮被蠢驴领导”。
1914年（第一次世界大战时期）：尽管失去了大部分工业产能，面对在兵力和工业实力上都更强大的敌人，法国人仍坚持战斗、浴血奋战。所以……不，他们在这场战争中表现并不糟糕，恰恰相反！你到底在说什么？
1940年（第二次世界大战时期）：没人想再经历一次大屠杀，所以法国尽可能地做好了准备……却仍是以应对上一场战争的方式来准备的。戴高乐等人倡导机械化作战方式，却被置之不理。随后，法兰西第三共和国陷入恐慌，下令屈辱投降，这又是“雄狮被年老、疲惫且胆怯的蠢驴领导”的一幕。
菲利普·普里让 律师（2013年至今）
1. France was extremely good in WW1. The Franco-German front was the hardest one and French units were dispatched to support weaker fronts, such as North Italy. France formed the bulk of Entente divisions and the war was won by French tanks and planes (the Germans remembered the lesson vividly and used the same weapons in WW2).
2. The so-called Franco-Prussian war was actually a Franco-German war, since all German states fought alongside Prussia. The issue here is numbers: the German army was twice as numerous because (a) France had a more professional army, without massive recruits, and (b) Germany was and by the way still is more populated than France. Some French generals hoped that French soldiers could still defeat their German counterparts even when outnumbered 1 to 2 (as during the Napoleonic wars), but it did not work because French soldiers and German soldiers are equal in quality.
1. 法国在第一次世界大战中的表现非常出色。法德战线是最艰难的战线，法国部队还被派往支援像意大利北部这样较弱的战线。法国是协约国部队的主力，而且这场战争的胜利要归功于法国的坦克和飞机（德国人清楚地吸取了这个教训，并在第二次世界大战中使用了同样的武器）。
2. 所谓的普法战争实际上是一场法德战争，因为当时所有德意志邦国都与普鲁士并肩作战。问题关键在于数量：德国军队的人数是法国的两倍，原因有二：（a）法国拥有一支更职业化的军队，没有大规模征兵；（b）德国当时的人口就比法国多，而且至今依然如此。一些法国将军希望法国士兵即便在兵力1比2处于劣势的情况下（就像拿破仑战争时期那样），仍能击败德国士兵，但这并没有奏效，因为法德两国士兵的素质不相上下。
3. During WW2, Germany had superior numbers (about 3.4 million soldiers v. 3.1 million Allied soldiers, and France had scrapped the barrel). WW2 was a mechanized war, in which movements are much faster (planes and tanks move much more quickly than footmen). Germany made a 500 km deep breakthrough thanks to mechanized units and the battle was over because France had basically no room left to create a second line and a good part of its army had been encircled.
4. By the way, during all the xiXth century and up to 1945 included, German commanders used to explain that French soldiers were the best apart from German soldiers. See e.g. Guderian, von Manstein, Rommel, Kesselring, Clausewitz, Hitler, etc.
3. 第二次世界大战期间，德国在兵力上占据优势（约340万士兵，而协约国士兵为310万，且法国已经竭尽全力征兵）。二战是一场机械化战争，部队机动速度快得多（飞机和坦克的移动速度远快于步兵）。凭借机械化部队，德国实现了500公里纵深的突破，战役就此结束，因为法国基本上已没有空间组建第二道防线，而且其很大一部分军队已经被包围。
4. 顺便提一句，在整个19世纪直至1945年（含1945年）期间，德国指挥官们常常表示，除了德国士兵之外，法国士兵是最优秀的。例如古德里安、冯·曼施坦因、隆美尔、凯塞林、克劳塞维茨、希特勒等人（都持此观点）。
Tanner Caillouet Just an avid reader and student of history.
坦纳·凯卢埃 历史爱好者及研究者
What do you mean Bad in war? The French have the most stellar military record of any modern nation. Going back hundreds of years the French have won more battles and wars than they have lost. Why would they still Exist as a people if this were not the case?
(Franco-prussian war is outside my expertise)
“在战争中表现糟糕”是什么意思？在所有现代国家中，法国拥有最辉煌的军事记录。回溯数百年历史，法国赢得的战役和战争比输掉的要多。如果情况并非如此，这个民族怎么可能存续至今？
（普法战争不在我的专业研究范围内）
WWI: The french fought incredibly well in the face of an overwhelming foe. A numerically superior one at that. Germany caused MASSIVE casualties in the first days of the war for the french as the French went to war the same way they did in the 1870s and 1800s. In bright Red trousers and Bright Blue coats. If you have ever wanted to know what a French Cuirassier looked like in the Napoleonic Period, go look at pictures of the first days of WWI in France. I shit you not, Full on Plate armor and Swords against machine guns and modern Artillery.
第一次世界大战：面对势不可挡的敌人，法国人的表现极为出色，而且敌人在兵力上还占据优势。战争初期，德国给法国造成了巨大伤亡，因为法国参战的方式与19世纪70年代和19世纪时如出一辙——士兵穿着鲜红色长裤和亮蓝色外套。如果你想知道拿破仑时期法国胸甲骑兵的模样，去看看第一次世界大战初期法国战场上的照片就知道了。我没开玩笑，他们身着全套板甲、手持长剑，去对抗机关枪和现代化火炮。
They just went to war as they always did, Marching in the open and in formation. They didn't know any better (or refused to change) and suffered as a result. They Adopted a more defensive posture and changed uniforms to the dull blue they were known for in both wars. These tactics really didn't change until 1918 when the war became more fluid. If you would like to learn more about WWI there is a series on Youtube called The Great War. In it Indie (the host) takes you through exactly what happened week by week 100 years ago. Many additional specials and on-battlefield sets including Verdun and a little place called Przemysl Fortress. Specials include the Weapons used in the war, down to equipment and uniforms, Grand Strategies of each nation and individual tactical Doctrines. All presented in the most wonderful format of a news cast covering the conflict as if it were happening today. It really sheds a new light on the war as you look at it as it happened rather than as a whole.
他们只是一如既往地投入战争，在开阔地带列队行进。他们要么是不懂更好的作战方式（要么就是拒绝改变），结果因此遭受重创。之后，他们采取了更偏向防御的姿态，并将制服换成了在这两场战争中为人熟知的暗蓝色。这种战术一直到1918年战争局势变得更具流动性时才真正改变。如果你想了解更多关于第一次世界大战的内容，YouTube上有一个名为《The Great War》（《伟大的战争》）的系列纪录片。主持人英迪会带你详细回顾100年前每周发生的事情，还有许多额外的专题内容和战场实景拍摄，包括凡尔登战役和一个名为普热梅希尔要塞的地方。专题内容涵盖了战争中使用的武器（细到装备和制服）、各国的总体战略以及具体的战术原则，所有内容都以新闻播报的绝佳形式呈现，仿佛这场冲突就发生在当下。当你按照事件发生的顺序而非从整体去看待这场战争时，它确实能让你对战争有全新的认识。
WWII: In the second World war it purely came down to tactics. While the French and English were relatively evenly match against the Germans, both sides had very different plans for the war. The English and French had envisioned another WWI. With both sides slugging it out in the trenches again. Meanwhile, the Germans had every intention to avoid that outcome and smash the other side as quickly as possible. Thus, the Blitzkrieg. Another deciding factor was how either side dispersed their tanks.
The English and French saw the Tank PURELY as an Infantry support vehicle or bunker buster. They dispersed their tanks in very small groups in Infantry regiments.
The Germans knew the real power of the Tank and created Entire Panzer divisions designed to concentrate and smash through a small part of the Front line then drive on into the support areas in the rear while Infantry (and Mechanized Infantry), attached to the panzer division would secure what the Panzers passed by.
This enabled the Germans to steamroll small groups of French and English tanks (during the invasion.) This also prevented the Allies from forming a well organized counter to the Panzer Division.
第二次世界大战：在二战中，（法国的失利）纯粹是战术层面的问题。尽管法国和英国在兵力上与德国相对势均力敌，但双方的作战计划却截然不同。英法两国预想的是又一场类似一战的战争，双方会再次在战壕里浴血奋战。与此同时，德国却一心想要避免这种结果，力求尽快击溃对方，于是“闪电战”应运而生。另一个决定性因素是双方部署坦克的方式。
英法两国仅将坦克视为步兵支援车辆或碉堡摧毁武器，他们将坦克以非常小的规模分散部署在步兵团中。
而德国人深知坦克的真正威力，他们组建了完整的装甲师，其设计用途就是集中力量突破前线的某个薄弱环节，然后向后方的支援区域推进，同时隶属于装甲师的步兵（和机械化步兵）会巩固坦克部队经过的区域。
这使得德国人在入侵期间能够轻松击溃英法两国的小规模坦克部队，也让协约国无法组织起有效的防御来对抗德国装甲师。
James Coyne Screenwriter (2008–present) Upvoted by Christian Desaix, PhD History, Louisiana State University
詹姆斯·科因 编剧（2008年至今） 获路易斯安那州立大学历史学博士克里斯蒂安·德赛克斯点赞
N.B. I have upxed this answer after doing some more research, thanks to Eric Lalouette for pushing me to look deeper.
At the head, let me first say that you are proceeding from a flawed assumption. The French in WW1 fought magnificently. Unlike the Germans, the French and British governments were democratic, and the people did not want war, and both those countries entered the first world war with much less prepared troops than their enemies.
注：经过进一步研究，我对这个回答进行了更新，感谢埃里克·拉卢埃特促使我更深入地探究（相关历史）。
首先，我想说的是，你的提问基于一个错误的假设。法国在第一次世界大战中的表现极为出色。与德国不同，法国和英国是民主国家，两国人民都不希望发生战争，而且这两个国家参战之时，军队的准备程度远不如他们的敌人。
But, looking at the Franco-Prussian war, I think the basic issue was one of preparedness and equipment. The French were in the middle of a re-organization effort. Their main armies were undermanned, and their reserves were heavily undertrained and were often unruly conscxts according to data from the era. The Germans had a long history of conscxtion, a new wave of nationalism, and a deeply professional general staff that organized their troops far more effectively that the French. Add to this the new krupps field gun. It was a breech loading artillery piece, the French still used muzzle loading artillery. The Germans could shell the french from further away, more accurately and at a greater range of fire. This played havoc with the French, and was a taste of the way wars would be fought for the next 50 years.
The French learned their lessons well, and by the First World War, had a strong general staff, excellent artillery and until their manpower was nearly exhausted and on the verge of mutiny, they fought very well, stopping the Germans on several key occasions and saving themselves from ruin. The cost those brave Frenchmen paid would come back to haunt them a generation later.
但从普法战争来看，我认为根本问题在于准备情况和装备水平。当时法国正处于军队重组阶段，主力部队兵力不足，而且根据当时的数据记载，其预备役部队训练严重不足，士兵多为不服管教的应征者。德国则有着悠久的征兵历史，当时还掀起了新的民族主义浪潮，并且拥有高度专业化的总参谋部，部队组织效率远高于法国。此外，德国还拥有新型克虏伯野战炮，这种火炮采用后膛装填方式，而法国仍在使用前膛装填火炮。德国人能够在更远的距离上对法国军队进行炮击，不仅精度更高，射程也更广。这给法国军队造成了极大混乱，也预示了未来50年战争的作战模式。
法国很好地吸取了教训，到第一次世界大战时，已经拥有了强大的总参谋部和精良的火炮装备。在兵力几乎耗尽、士兵濒临哗变之前，法国军队的表现一直非常出色，多次在关键战役中阻挡了德军的进攻，使国家免于覆灭。然而，这些勇敢的法国人所付出的代价，在一代人之后给他们带来了困扰。
Victory proved a dangerous thing for the French in the interwar years. They tended to take the wrong lessons from the conflict, and because they took a naturally defensive position made some critical errors. In tank design, the French thought of their tanks as mobile fortresses, designing huge, powerful, but slow and limited range machines like the Char 1bis. The famous Maginot Line was unbreakable but incomplete. Some historians also point to the sense of false security the line engendered in French society, leaving them unprepared, as a society and military, for the reality of the total war to come. As a concept in the mid 20’s it took years to finance and build, but the time the first casements come on line, there is an argument to be made that it was already obsolete. Obsolete or not, the Germans avoided it totally, and when they did run into it, the line did it’s job well. It was a huge investment by the French Government, one that backfired in many ways.
在两次世界大战之间的时期，胜利对法国而言反而成了一件危险的事。他们往往从之前的战争中吸取了错误的经验教训，而且由于本能地采取防御姿态，犯了一些关键性错误。在坦克设计方面，法国将坦克视为移动的堡垒，设计出像Char 1bis（夏尔1bis）那样体积庞大、火力强劲但速度缓慢且续航能力有限的坦克。著名的马奇诺防线坚不可摧，却并不完整。一些历史学家还指出，这条防线在法国社会中催生了虚假的安全感，使得法国无论是社会层面还是军事层面，都对即将到来的全面战争缺乏准备。马奇诺防线作为20世纪20年代提出的概念，其融资和建造耗时多年，但当第一批防御工事投入使用时，有观点认为它已经过时了。无论是否过时，德国人完全避开了这条防线，而当他们确实遭遇防线时，防线也起到了应有的防御作用。这是法国政府的一项巨额投资，却在多个方面产生了适得其反的效果。
Another key component of the French defeat in 1940 is that her military just wasn’t what it had been in generations past. Expectations from her allies were reliant on her example from the first war, but France was a shell of her proud pre-1914-self in 1940. Consistent failure by the US, and the UK to maintain the Versailles Agreement had broken the safety restraints the French were relying on for their national safety. They were massively unprepared for war in 1939.
1940年法国战败的另一个关键因素是，其军队已不复往日雄风。盟国对法国的期望基于它在第一次世界大战中的表现，但1940年的法国早已不是1914年之前那个令人自豪的强国了。美国和英国一直未能维护《凡尔赛和约》的效力，这打破了法国赖以保障国家安全的制约机制，导致法国在1939年时对战争毫无准备。
By far, in my humble opinion, the biggest mistake that the French made was a failure to upgrade their communication systems between the wars. The Germans had radios in their tanks, had field communications that integrated their armies efficiently and worked as what militaries today call a ‘force multiplier’. The French used motorcycle messengers. They reacted at speeds acceptable in the first war, but wholly behind the curve in 1940. Their nearly paranoid refusal to work with their allies resulted in the disastrous miscommunication between the French and British troops, making it all too easy to drive between them and crucially for the French, get behind the main body of troops and encircle them.
在我看来，到目前为止，法国在两次世界大战之间犯下的最大错误是未能升级其通信系统。德国的坦克配备了无线电设备，其野外通信系统能高效地整合各支部队，起到了如今军方所说的“力量倍增器”的作用。而法国则依靠摩托车信使传递信息，这种反应速度在第一次世界大战中尚可接受，但在1940年已经远远落后于时代。此外，法国近乎偏执地拒绝与盟国合作，导致法英军队之间出现了严重的沟通失误，这使得德军很容易在两国军队之间撕开缺口，而对法国而言至关重要的是，德军得以绕到其主力部队后方并将其包围。
Here, the lessons of World War 1 really came back to haunt the Allies. The French government, all of them veterans of, survivors of, and witnesses to the carnage of the First World War did not have the stomach for another national blood letting. They had lost 1.1 million men in combat in the first war. For a sense of comparison, thats more deaths than the United States has seen in every war of the 20th century, combined.
That said, the units of French soldiers who fought in the line at Dunkirk, who evacuated and trained and fought with the allies in Africa, Sicily, and to liberate their homeland 5 years later, were some of the bravest men to fight in the Second World War.
We like to joke about French rifles (dropped once, never fired) or French tanks (5 gears, 1 forward, 4 in reverse) - but in realty, the French Fighting Man was, and always has been, the equal of any on the battlefield.
在此，第一次世界大战的教训确实给协约国带来了困扰。法国政府的成员要么是第一次世界大战的老兵、幸存者，要么是那场大屠杀的目击者，他们无法承受再一次的国家流血牺牲。法国在第一次世界大战的战斗中损失了110万人，相比之下，这个数字超过了美国在20世纪所有战争中死亡人数的总和。
尽管如此，在敦刻尔克前线作战、随后撤离并接受训练，之后又在非洲、西西里岛与盟国并肩作战，且在5年后参与解放祖国的法国士兵部队，是第二次世界大战中最勇敢的战斗群体之一。
我们总喜欢拿法国步枪（扔下一次，从未开过火）或法国坦克（5个档位，1个前进档，4个倒档）开玩笑，但事实上，法国士兵过去是、现在依然是战场上与任何士兵都不相上下的优秀战士。
Anthony Ames IT Contractor at Charles Schwab (2018–present)
安东尼·埃姆斯 嘉信理财公司信息技术承包商（2018年至今）
Well, in 1870 the French had clueless leaders in whom no one had any faith, and a debacle ensued. Among other things, Napoleon III grossly underestimated Prussia's ability to unify and rally Germany.
The French actually did quite well in 1914-18, considering they were up against the nastiest military machine on earth. Unfortunately, in winning they lost 20% of their young men, including many of their best potential leaders. These frightful losses cut the birth rate and drove the French into a kind of collective nervous breakdown after WWI.
So in 1940 the French were beset with a shortage of men, mediocre leadership, miserable morale, and a raging dispute between Left and Right over who was responsible for the mess. They were simply in no shape to face Germany again.
1870年时，法国的领导人昏庸无能，无人信服，一场惨败随之而来。其中，拿破仑三世严重低估了普鲁士统一和团结德国的能力。
考虑到法国在1914至1918年期间对抗的是当时世界上最凶狠的军事机器，他们的实际表现相当不错。不幸的是，虽然取得了胜利，法国却损失了20%的青年男性，其中包括许多极具潜力的未来领袖。这些惨重的损失导致法国出生率下降，并在一战后使法国陷入了一种集体性的精神崩溃状态。
因此，1940年的法国面临着兵员短缺、领导层平庸、士气低落的问题，而且左右两派还在激烈争论谁该为这一混乱局面负责。他们根本没有能力再次对抗德国。
Neil K. MacMillan Freelance writer specializing in historical subjects and criminal history.
尼尔·K·麦克米伦 专攻历史题材和犯罪史的自由撰稿人
Where do you get the idea the French were bad in all three of those wars? Yes France lost the Franco-Prussian War. They were out generaled by Von Moltke and the Prussians. France basically lost a generation of young men in World War One, but they handled themselves as well as any of the other combatants and better than some. It is easy to cast aspersions, but the majority of fighting on the Western Front took place in France and Belgium. I respectfully disagree with your assertion they were "bad" in the First World War. In the Second World War their problem was leadership. The average soldier was brave and well trained, but were poorly served by their leaders. And, let's face it, in 1940, the Germans were much better at tank warfare and integrated arms than most of the allied nations were. The Allies got better at it and didn't have to contend with their political leaders interfering with their military commanders by the way, Charles De Gaulle was actually one of the better French generals in WWII and handled his command quite competently during the French campaign of 1940.
你从哪里得出法国在这三场战争中表现都很糟糕的结论？诚然，法国输掉了普法战争，因为他们的将领在指挥上不及冯·毛奇和普鲁士人。在第一次世界大战中，法国基本上损失了一代人的青年男性，但他们的表现并不逊色于其他参战国，甚至比有些国家还要好。说三道四很容易，但西线的大部分战斗都发生在法国和比利时境内。我不认同你关于法国在第一次世界大战中“表现糟糕”的说法。在第二次世界大战中，法国的问题出在领导层。普通士兵勇敢且训练有素，却未能得到领导层的良好指挥。而且，说实话，1940年时，德国在坦克作战和诸军兵种协同作战方面的能力远超大多数协约国。后来协约国在这方面的能力有所提升，而且不必应对政治领导人对军事指挥官的干预。顺便提一句，夏尔·戴高乐实际上是二战中法国较为优秀的将领之一，在1940年的法国战役中，他对所部的指挥相当出色。
Orlando Barrios Cashier at Super-Duper Mart
奥兰多·巴里奥斯 超级超市收银员
1870: Nappy III over-reacted to a silly, snotty telegram, together with an irresponsible, hysterical press. They fought for wounded pride, not for a real grievance. The French Army was ordered to hole themselves up in their fortresses, instead of taking the initiative. Lions led by donkeys.
1914: they fought on, and fought on despite losing much of their industry, against a numerically and industrially stronger enemy. So… no, they were not bad in this one, au contraire! What are you talking about?
1940: nobody wanted another slaughter, so they were as ready as they could be… to fight the last war. De Gaulle and others, who preached a mechanized form of warfare, were ignored. Then the Third Republic panicked and ordered an ignominious surrender. Lions led by old, tired, fearful donkeys.
1870年：拿破仑三世对一封愚蠢无礼的电报反应过度，再加上媒体不负责任的狂热报道，法国为了受损的尊严而非真正的冤屈发动了战争。法国军队接到的命令是固守堡垒，而非主动出击，这可谓是“雄狮被蠢驴领导”。
1914年（第一次世界大战时期）：尽管失去了大部分工业产能，面对在兵力和工业实力上都更强大的敌人，法国人仍坚持战斗、浴血奋战。所以……不，他们在这场战争中表现并不糟糕，恰恰相反！你到底在说什么？
1940年（第二次世界大战时期）：没人想再经历一次大屠杀，所以法国尽可能地做好了准备……却仍是以应对上一场战争的方式来准备的。戴高乐等人倡导机械化作战方式，却被置之不理。随后，法兰西第三共和国陷入恐慌，下令屈辱投降，这又是“雄狮被年老、疲惫且胆怯的蠢驴领导”的一幕。
评论翻译
Philippe Prigent Lawyer (2013–present)
菲利普·普里让 律师（2013年至今）
1. France was extremely good in WW1. The Franco-German front was the hardest one and French units were dispatched to support weaker fronts, such as North Italy. France formed the bulk of Entente divisions and the war was won by French tanks and planes (the Germans remembered the lesson vividly and used the same weapons in WW2).
2. The so-called Franco-Prussian war was actually a Franco-German war, since all German states fought alongside Prussia. The issue here is numbers: the German army was twice as numerous because (a) France had a more professional army, without massive recruits, and (b) Germany was and by the way still is more populated than France. Some French generals hoped that French soldiers could still defeat their German counterparts even when outnumbered 1 to 2 (as during the Napoleonic wars), but it did not work because French soldiers and German soldiers are equal in quality.
1. 法国在第一次世界大战中的表现非常出色。法德战线是最艰难的战线，法国部队还被派往支援像意大利北部这样较弱的战线。法国是协约国部队的主力，而且这场战争的胜利要归功于法国的坦克和飞机（德国人清楚地吸取了这个教训，并在第二次世界大战中使用了同样的武器）。
2. 所谓的普法战争实际上是一场法德战争，因为当时所有德意志邦国都与普鲁士并肩作战。问题关键在于数量：德国军队的人数是法国的两倍，原因有二：（a）法国拥有一支更职业化的军队，没有大规模征兵；（b）德国当时的人口就比法国多，而且至今依然如此。一些法国将军希望法国士兵即便在兵力1比2处于劣势的情况下（就像拿破仑战争时期那样），仍能击败德国士兵，但这并没有奏效，因为法德两国士兵的素质不相上下。
3. During WW2, Germany had superior numbers (about 3.4 million soldiers v. 3.1 million Allied soldiers, and France had scrapped the barrel). WW2 was a mechanized war, in which movements are much faster (planes and tanks move much more quickly than footmen). Germany made a 500 km deep breakthrough thanks to mechanized units and the battle was over because France had basically no room left to create a second line and a good part of its army had been encircled.
4. By the way, during all the xiXth century and up to 1945 included, German commanders used to explain that French soldiers were the best apart from German soldiers. See e.g. Guderian, von Manstein, Rommel, Kesselring, Clausewitz, Hitler, etc.
3. 第二次世界大战期间，德国在兵力上占据优势（约340万士兵，而协约国士兵为310万，且法国已经竭尽全力征兵）。二战是一场机械化战争，部队机动速度快得多（飞机和坦克的移动速度远快于步兵）。凭借机械化部队，德国实现了500公里纵深的突破，战役就此结束，因为法国基本上已没有空间组建第二道防线，而且其很大一部分军队已经被包围。
4. 顺便提一句，在整个19世纪直至1945年（含1945年）期间，德国指挥官们常常表示，除了德国士兵之外，法国士兵是最优秀的。例如古德里安、冯·曼施坦因、隆美尔、凯塞林、克劳塞维茨、希特勒等人（都持此观点）。
Tanner Caillouet Just an avid reader and student of history.
坦纳·凯卢埃 历史爱好者及研究者
What do you mean Bad in war? The French have the most stellar military record of any modern nation. Going back hundreds of years the French have won more battles and wars than they have lost. Why would they still Exist as a people if this were not the case?
(Franco-prussian war is outside my expertise)
“在战争中表现糟糕”是什么意思？在所有现代国家中，法国拥有最辉煌的军事记录。回溯数百年历史，法国赢得的战役和战争比输掉的要多。如果情况并非如此，这个民族怎么可能存续至今？
（普法战争不在我的专业研究范围内）
WWI: The french fought incredibly well in the face of an overwhelming foe. A numerically superior one at that. Germany caused MASSIVE casualties in the first days of the war for the french as the French went to war the same way they did in the 1870s and 1800s. In bright Red trousers and Bright Blue coats. If you have ever wanted to know what a French Cuirassier looked like in the Napoleonic Period, go look at pictures of the first days of WWI in France. I shit you not, Full on Plate armor and Swords against machine guns and modern Artillery.
第一次世界大战：面对势不可挡的敌人，法国人的表现极为出色，而且敌人在兵力上还占据优势。战争初期，德国给法国造成了巨大伤亡，因为法国参战的方式与19世纪70年代和19世纪时如出一辙——士兵穿着鲜红色长裤和亮蓝色外套。如果你想知道拿破仑时期法国胸甲骑兵的模样，去看看第一次世界大战初期法国战场上的照片就知道了。我没开玩笑，他们身着全套板甲、手持长剑，去对抗机关枪和现代化火炮。
They just went to war as they always did, Marching in the open and in formation. They didn't know any better (or refused to change) and suffered as a result. They Adopted a more defensive posture and changed uniforms to the dull blue they were known for in both wars. These tactics really didn't change until 1918 when the war became more fluid. If you would like to learn more about WWI there is a series on Youtube called The Great War. In it Indie (the host) takes you through exactly what happened week by week 100 years ago. Many additional specials and on-battlefield sets including Verdun and a little place called Przemysl Fortress. Specials include the Weapons used in the war, down to equipment and uniforms, Grand Strategies of each nation and individual tactical Doctrines. All presented in the most wonderful format of a news cast covering the conflict as if it were happening today. It really sheds a new light on the war as you look at it as it happened rather than as a whole.
他们只是一如既往地投入战争，在开阔地带列队行进。他们要么是不懂更好的作战方式（要么就是拒绝改变），结果因此遭受重创。之后，他们采取了更偏向防御的姿态，并将制服换成了在这两场战争中为人熟知的暗蓝色。这种战术一直到1918年战争局势变得更具流动性时才真正改变。如果你想了解更多关于第一次世界大战的内容，YouTube上有一个名为《The Great War》（《伟大的战争》）的系列纪录片。主持人英迪会带你详细回顾100年前每周发生的事情，还有许多额外的专题内容和战场实景拍摄，包括凡尔登战役和一个名为普热梅希尔要塞的地方。专题内容涵盖了战争中使用的武器（细到装备和制服）、各国的总体战略以及具体的战术原则，所有内容都以新闻播报的绝佳形式呈现，仿佛这场冲突就发生在当下。当你按照事件发生的顺序而非从整体去看待这场战争时，它确实能让你对战争有全新的认识。
WWII: In the second World war it purely came down to tactics. While the French and English were relatively evenly match against the Germans, both sides had very different plans for the war. The English and French had envisioned another WWI. With both sides slugging it out in the trenches again. Meanwhile, the Germans had every intention to avoid that outcome and smash the other side as quickly as possible. Thus, the Blitzkrieg. Another deciding factor was how either side dispersed their tanks.
The English and French saw the Tank PURELY as an Infantry support vehicle or bunker buster. They dispersed their tanks in very small groups in Infantry regiments.
The Germans knew the real power of the Tank and created Entire Panzer divisions designed to concentrate and smash through a small part of the Front line then drive on into the support areas in the rear while Infantry (and Mechanized Infantry), attached to the panzer division would secure what the Panzers passed by.
This enabled the Germans to steamroll small groups of French and English tanks (during the invasion.) This also prevented the Allies from forming a well organized counter to the Panzer Division.
第二次世界大战：在二战中，（法国的失利）纯粹是战术层面的问题。尽管法国和英国在兵力上与德国相对势均力敌，但双方的作战计划却截然不同。英法两国预想的是又一场类似一战的战争，双方会再次在战壕里浴血奋战。与此同时，德国却一心想要避免这种结果，力求尽快击溃对方，于是“闪电战”应运而生。另一个决定性因素是双方部署坦克的方式。
英法两国仅将坦克视为步兵支援车辆或碉堡摧毁武器，他们将坦克以非常小的规模分散部署在步兵团中。
而德国人深知坦克的真正威力，他们组建了完整的装甲师，其设计用途就是集中力量突破前线的某个薄弱环节，然后向后方的支援区域推进，同时隶属于装甲师的步兵（和机械化步兵）会巩固坦克部队经过的区域。
这使得德国人在入侵期间能够轻松击溃英法两国的小规模坦克部队，也让协约国无法组织起有效的防御来对抗德国装甲师。
James Coyne Screenwriter (2008–present) Upvoted by Christian Desaix, PhD History, Louisiana State University
詹姆斯·科因 编剧（2008年至今） 获路易斯安那州立大学历史学博士克里斯蒂安·德赛克斯点赞
N.B. I have upxed this answer after doing some more research, thanks to Eric Lalouette for pushing me to look deeper.
At the head, let me first say that you are proceeding from a flawed assumption. The French in WW1 fought magnificently. Unlike the Germans, the French and British governments were democratic, and the people did not want war, and both those countries entered the first world war with much less prepared troops than their enemies.
注：经过进一步研究，我对这个回答进行了更新，感谢埃里克·拉卢埃特促使我更深入地探究（相关历史）。
首先，我想说的是，你的提问基于一个错误的假设。法国在第一次世界大战中的表现极为出色。与德国不同，法国和英国是民主国家，两国人民都不希望发生战争，而且这两个国家参战之时，军队的准备程度远不如他们的敌人。
But, looking at the Franco-Prussian war, I think the basic issue was one of preparedness and equipment. The French were in the middle of a re-organization effort. Their main armies were undermanned, and their reserves were heavily undertrained and were often unruly conscxts according to data from the era. The Germans had a long history of conscxtion, a new wave of nationalism, and a deeply professional general staff that organized their troops far more effectively that the French. Add to this the new krupps field gun. It was a breech loading artillery piece, the French still used muzzle loading artillery. The Germans could shell the french from further away, more accurately and at a greater range of fire. This played havoc with the French, and was a taste of the way wars would be fought for the next 50 years.
The French learned their lessons well, and by the First World War, had a strong general staff, excellent artillery and until their manpower was nearly exhausted and on the verge of mutiny, they fought very well, stopping the Germans on several key occasions and saving themselves from ruin. The cost those brave Frenchmen paid would come back to haunt them a generation later.
但从普法战争来看，我认为根本问题在于准备情况和装备水平。当时法国正处于军队重组阶段，主力部队兵力不足，而且根据当时的数据记载，其预备役部队训练严重不足，士兵多为不服管教的应征者。德国则有着悠久的征兵历史，当时还掀起了新的民族主义浪潮，并且拥有高度专业化的总参谋部，部队组织效率远高于法国。此外，德国还拥有新型克虏伯野战炮，这种火炮采用后膛装填方式，而法国仍在使用前膛装填火炮。德国人能够在更远的距离上对法国军队进行炮击，不仅精度更高，射程也更广。这给法国军队造成了极大混乱，也预示了未来50年战争的作战模式。
法国很好地吸取了教训，到第一次世界大战时，已经拥有了强大的总参谋部和精良的火炮装备。在兵力几乎耗尽、士兵濒临哗变之前，法国军队的表现一直非常出色，多次在关键战役中阻挡了德军的进攻，使国家免于覆灭。然而，这些勇敢的法国人所付出的代价，在一代人之后给他们带来了困扰。
Victory proved a dangerous thing for the French in the interwar years. They tended to take the wrong lessons from the conflict, and because they took a naturally defensive position made some critical errors. In tank design, the French thought of their tanks as mobile fortresses, designing huge, powerful, but slow and limited range machines like the Char 1bis. The famous Maginot Line was unbreakable but incomplete. Some historians also point to the sense of false security the line engendered in French society, leaving them unprepared, as a society and military, for the reality of the total war to come. As a concept in the mid 20’s it took years to finance and build, but the time the first casements come on line, there is an argument to be made that it was already obsolete. Obsolete or not, the Germans avoided it totally, and when they did run into it, the line did it’s job well. It was a huge investment by the French Government, one that backfired in many ways.
在两次世界大战之间的时期，胜利对法国而言反而成了一件危险的事。他们往往从之前的战争中吸取了错误的经验教训，而且由于本能地采取防御姿态，犯了一些关键性错误。在坦克设计方面，法国将坦克视为移动的堡垒，设计出像Char 1bis（夏尔1bis）那样体积庞大、火力强劲但速度缓慢且续航能力有限的坦克。著名的马奇诺防线坚不可摧，却并不完整。一些历史学家还指出，这条防线在法国社会中催生了虚假的安全感，使得法国无论是社会层面还是军事层面，都对即将到来的全面战争缺乏准备。马奇诺防线作为20世纪20年代提出的概念，其融资和建造耗时多年，但当第一批防御工事投入使用时，有观点认为它已经过时了。无论是否过时，德国人完全避开了这条防线，而当他们确实遭遇防线时，防线也起到了应有的防御作用。这是法国政府的一项巨额投资，却在多个方面产生了适得其反的效果。
Another key component of the French defeat in 1940 is that her military just wasn’t what it had been in generations past. Expectations from her allies were reliant on her example from the first war, but France was a shell of her proud pre-1914-self in 1940. Consistent failure by the US, and the UK to maintain the Versailles Agreement had broken the safety restraints the French were relying on for their national safety. They were massively unprepared for war in 1939.
1940年法国战败的另一个关键因素是，其军队已不复往日雄风。盟国对法国的期望基于它在第一次世界大战中的表现，但1940年的法国早已不是1914年之前那个令人自豪的强国了。美国和英国一直未能维护《凡尔赛和约》的效力，这打破了法国赖以保障国家安全的制约机制，导致法国在1939年时对战争毫无准备。
By far, in my humble opinion, the biggest mistake that the French made was a failure to upgrade their communication systems between the wars. The Germans had radios in their tanks, had field communications that integrated their armies efficiently and worked as what militaries today call a ‘force multiplier’. The French used motorcycle messengers. They reacted at speeds acceptable in the first war, but wholly behind the curve in 1940. Their nearly paranoid refusal to work with their allies resulted in the disastrous miscommunication between the French and British troops, making it all too easy to drive between them and crucially for the French, get behind the main body of troops and encircle them.
在我看来，到目前为止，法国在两次世界大战之间犯下的最大错误是未能升级其通信系统。德国的坦克配备了无线电设备，其野外通信系统能高效地整合各支部队，起到了如今军方所说的“力量倍增器”的作用。而法国则依靠摩托车信使传递信息，这种反应速度在第一次世界大战中尚可接受，但在1940年已经远远落后于时代。此外，法国近乎偏执地拒绝与盟国合作，导致法英军队之间出现了严重的沟通失误，这使得德军很容易在两国军队之间撕开缺口，而对法国而言至关重要的是，德军得以绕到其主力部队后方并将其包围。
Here, the lessons of World War 1 really came back to haunt the Allies. The French government, all of them veterans of, survivors of, and witnesses to the carnage of the First World War did not have the stomach for another national blood letting. They had lost 1.1 million men in combat in the first war. For a sense of comparison, thats more deaths than the United States has seen in every war of the 20th century, combined.
That said, the units of French soldiers who fought in the line at Dunkirk, who evacuated and trained and fought with the allies in Africa, Sicily, and to liberate their homeland 5 years later, were some of the bravest men to fight in the Second World War.
We like to joke about French rifles (dropped once, never fired) or French tanks (5 gears, 1 forward, 4 in reverse) - but in realty, the French Fighting Man was, and always has been, the equal of any on the battlefield.
在此，第一次世界大战的教训确实给协约国带来了困扰。法国政府的成员要么是第一次世界大战的老兵、幸存者，要么是那场大屠杀的目击者，他们无法承受再一次的国家流血牺牲。法国在第一次世界大战的战斗中损失了110万人，相比之下，这个数字超过了美国在20世纪所有战争中死亡人数的总和。
尽管如此，在敦刻尔克前线作战、随后撤离并接受训练，之后又在非洲、西西里岛与盟国并肩作战，且在5年后参与解放祖国的法国士兵部队，是第二次世界大战中最勇敢的战斗群体之一。
我们总喜欢拿法国步枪（扔下一次，从未开过火）或法国坦克（5个档位，1个前进档，4个倒档）开玩笑，但事实上，法国士兵过去是、现在依然是战场上与任何士兵都不相上下的优秀战士。
Anthony Ames IT Contractor at Charles Schwab (2018–present)
安东尼·埃姆斯 嘉信理财公司信息技术承包商（2018年至今）
Well, in 1870 the French had clueless leaders in whom no one had any faith, and a debacle ensued. Among other things, Napoleon III grossly underestimated Prussia's ability to unify and rally Germany.
The French actually did quite well in 1914-18, considering they were up against the nastiest military machine on earth. Unfortunately, in winning they lost 20% of their young men, including many of their best potential leaders. These frightful losses cut the birth rate and drove the French into a kind of collective nervous breakdown after WWI.
So in 1940 the French were beset with a shortage of men, mediocre leadership, miserable morale, and a raging dispute between Left and Right over who was responsible for the mess. They were simply in no shape to face Germany again.
1870年时，法国的领导人昏庸无能，无人信服，一场惨败随之而来。其中，拿破仑三世严重低估了普鲁士统一和团结德国的能力。
考虑到法国在1914至1918年期间对抗的是当时世界上最凶狠的军事机器，他们的实际表现相当不错。不幸的是，虽然取得了胜利，法国却损失了20%的青年男性，其中包括许多极具潜力的未来领袖。这些惨重的损失导致法国出生率下降，并在一战后使法国陷入了一种集体性的精神崩溃状态。
因此，1940年的法国面临着兵员短缺、领导层平庸、士气低落的问题，而且左右两派还在激烈争论谁该为这一混乱局面负责。他们根本没有能力再次对抗德国。
Neil K. MacMillan Freelance writer specializing in historical subjects and criminal history.
尼尔·K·麦克米伦 专攻历史题材和犯罪史的自由撰稿人
Where do you get the idea the French were bad in all three of those wars? Yes France lost the Franco-Prussian War. They were out generaled by Von Moltke and the Prussians. France basically lost a generation of young men in World War One, but they handled themselves as well as any of the other combatants and better than some. It is easy to cast aspersions, but the majority of fighting on the Western Front took place in France and Belgium. I respectfully disagree with your assertion they were "bad" in the First World War. In the Second World War their problem was leadership. The average soldier was brave and well trained, but were poorly served by their leaders. And, let's face it, in 1940, the Germans were much better at tank warfare and integrated arms than most of the allied nations were. The Allies got better at it and didn't have to contend with their political leaders interfering with their military commanders by the way, Charles De Gaulle was actually one of the better French generals in WWII and handled his command quite competently during the French campaign of 1940.
你从哪里得出法国在这三场战争中表现都很糟糕的结论？诚然，法国输掉了普法战争，因为他们的将领在指挥上不及冯·毛奇和普鲁士人。在第一次世界大战中，法国基本上损失了一代人的青年男性，但他们的表现并不逊色于其他参战国，甚至比有些国家还要好。说三道四很容易，但西线的大部分战斗都发生在法国和比利时境内。我不认同你关于法国在第一次世界大战中“表现糟糕”的说法。在第二次世界大战中，法国的问题出在领导层。普通士兵勇敢且训练有素，却未能得到领导层的良好指挥。而且，说实话，1940年时，德国在坦克作战和诸军兵种协同作战方面的能力远超大多数协约国。后来协约国在这方面的能力有所提升，而且不必应对政治领导人对军事指挥官的干预。顺便提一句，夏尔·戴高乐实际上是二战中法国较为优秀的将领之一，在1940年的法国战役中，他对所部的指挥相当出色。
Orlando Barrios Cashier at Super-Duper Mart
奥兰多·巴里奥斯 超级超市收银员
1870: Nappy III over-reacted to a silly, snotty telegram, together with an irresponsible, hysterical press. They fought for wounded pride, not for a real grievance. The French Army was ordered to hole themselves up in their fortresses, instead of taking the initiative. Lions led by donkeys.
1914: they fought on, and fought on despite losing much of their industry, against a numerically and industrially stronger enemy. So… no, they were not bad in this one, au contraire! What are you talking about?
1940: nobody wanted another slaughter, so they were as ready as they could be… to fight the last war. De Gaulle and others, who preached a mechanized form of warfare, were ignored. Then the Third Republic panicked and ordered an ignominious surrender. Lions led by old, tired, fearful donkeys.
1870年：拿破仑三世对一封愚蠢无礼的电报反应过度，再加上媒体不负责任的狂热报道，法国为了受损的尊严而非真正的冤屈发动了战争。法国军队接到的命令是固守堡垒，而非主动出击，这可谓是“雄狮被蠢驴领导”。
1914年（第一次世界大战时期）：尽管失去了大部分工业产能，面对在兵力和工业实力上都更强大的敌人，法国人仍坚持战斗、浴血奋战。所以……不，他们在这场战争中表现并不糟糕，恰恰相反！你到底在说什么？
1940年（第二次世界大战时期）：没人想再经历一次大屠杀，所以法国尽可能地做好了准备……却仍是以应对上一场战争的方式来准备的。戴高乐等人倡导机械化作战方式，却被置之不理。随后，法兰西第三共和国陷入恐慌，下令屈辱投降，这又是“雄狮被年老、疲惫且胆怯的蠢驴领导”的一幕。
菲利普·普里让 律师（2013年至今）
1. France was extremely good in WW1. The Franco-German front was the hardest one and French units were dispatched to support weaker fronts, such as North Italy. France formed the bulk of Entente divisions and the war was won by French tanks and planes (the Germans remembered the lesson vividly and used the same weapons in WW2).
2. The so-called Franco-Prussian war was actually a Franco-German war, since all German states fought alongside Prussia. The issue here is numbers: the German army was twice as numerous because (a) France had a more professional army, without massive recruits, and (b) Germany was and by the way still is more populated than France. Some French generals hoped that French soldiers could still defeat their German counterparts even when outnumbered 1 to 2 (as during the Napoleonic wars), but it did not work because French soldiers and German soldiers are equal in quality.
1. 法国在第一次世界大战中的表现非常出色。法德战线是最艰难的战线，法国部队还被派往支援像意大利北部这样较弱的战线。法国是协约国部队的主力，而且这场战争的胜利要归功于法国的坦克和飞机（德国人清楚地吸取了这个教训，并在第二次世界大战中使用了同样的武器）。
2. 所谓的普法战争实际上是一场法德战争，因为当时所有德意志邦国都与普鲁士并肩作战。问题关键在于数量：德国军队的人数是法国的两倍，原因有二：（a）法国拥有一支更职业化的军队，没有大规模征兵；（b）德国当时的人口就比法国多，而且至今依然如此。一些法国将军希望法国士兵即便在兵力1比2处于劣势的情况下（就像拿破仑战争时期那样），仍能击败德国士兵，但这并没有奏效，因为法德两国士兵的素质不相上下。
3. During WW2, Germany had superior numbers (about 3.4 million soldiers v. 3.1 million Allied soldiers, and France had scrapped the barrel). WW2 was a mechanized war, in which movements are much faster (planes and tanks move much more quickly than footmen). Germany made a 500 km deep breakthrough thanks to mechanized units and the battle was over because France had basically no room left to create a second line and a good part of its army had been encircled.
4. By the way, during all the xiXth century and up to 1945 included, German commanders used to explain that French soldiers were the best apart from German soldiers. See e.g. Guderian, von Manstein, Rommel, Kesselring, Clausewitz, Hitler, etc.
3. 第二次世界大战期间，德国在兵力上占据优势（约340万士兵，而协约国士兵为310万，且法国已经竭尽全力征兵）。二战是一场机械化战争，部队机动速度快得多（飞机和坦克的移动速度远快于步兵）。凭借机械化部队，德国实现了500公里纵深的突破，战役就此结束，因为法国基本上已没有空间组建第二道防线，而且其很大一部分军队已经被包围。
4. 顺便提一句，在整个19世纪直至1945年（含1945年）期间，德国指挥官们常常表示，除了德国士兵之外，法国士兵是最优秀的。例如古德里安、冯·曼施坦因、隆美尔、凯塞林、克劳塞维茨、希特勒等人（都持此观点）。
Tanner Caillouet Just an avid reader and student of history.
坦纳·凯卢埃 历史爱好者及研究者
What do you mean Bad in war? The French have the most stellar military record of any modern nation. Going back hundreds of years the French have won more battles and wars than they have lost. Why would they still Exist as a people if this were not the case?
(Franco-prussian war is outside my expertise)
“在战争中表现糟糕”是什么意思？在所有现代国家中，法国拥有最辉煌的军事记录。回溯数百年历史，法国赢得的战役和战争比输掉的要多。如果情况并非如此，这个民族怎么可能存续至今？
（普法战争不在我的专业研究范围内）
WWI: The french fought incredibly well in the face of an overwhelming foe. A numerically superior one at that. Germany caused MASSIVE casualties in the first days of the war for the french as the French went to war the same way they did in the 1870s and 1800s. In bright Red trousers and Bright Blue coats. If you have ever wanted to know what a French Cuirassier looked like in the Napoleonic Period, go look at pictures of the first days of WWI in France. I shit you not, Full on Plate armor and Swords against machine guns and modern Artillery.
第一次世界大战：面对势不可挡的敌人，法国人的表现极为出色，而且敌人在兵力上还占据优势。战争初期，德国给法国造成了巨大伤亡，因为法国参战的方式与19世纪70年代和19世纪时如出一辙——士兵穿着鲜红色长裤和亮蓝色外套。如果你想知道拿破仑时期法国胸甲骑兵的模样，去看看第一次世界大战初期法国战场上的照片就知道了。我没开玩笑，他们身着全套板甲、手持长剑，去对抗机关枪和现代化火炮。
They just went to war as they always did, Marching in the open and in formation. They didn't know any better (or refused to change) and suffered as a result. They Adopted a more defensive posture and changed uniforms to the dull blue they were known for in both wars. These tactics really didn't change until 1918 when the war became more fluid. If you would like to learn more about WWI there is a series on Youtube called The Great War. In it Indie (the host) takes you through exactly what happened week by week 100 years ago. Many additional specials and on-battlefield sets including Verdun and a little place called Przemysl Fortress. Specials include the Weapons used in the war, down to equipment and uniforms, Grand Strategies of each nation and individual tactical Doctrines. All presented in the most wonderful format of a news cast covering the conflict as if it were happening today. It really sheds a new light on the war as you look at it as it happened rather than as a whole.
他们只是一如既往地投入战争，在开阔地带列队行进。他们要么是不懂更好的作战方式（要么就是拒绝改变），结果因此遭受重创。之后，他们采取了更偏向防御的姿态，并将制服换成了在这两场战争中为人熟知的暗蓝色。这种战术一直到1918年战争局势变得更具流动性时才真正改变。如果你想了解更多关于第一次世界大战的内容，YouTube上有一个名为《The Great War》（《伟大的战争》）的系列纪录片。主持人英迪会带你详细回顾100年前每周发生的事情，还有许多额外的专题内容和战场实景拍摄，包括凡尔登战役和一个名为普热梅希尔要塞的地方。专题内容涵盖了战争中使用的武器（细到装备和制服）、各国的总体战略以及具体的战术原则，所有内容都以新闻播报的绝佳形式呈现，仿佛这场冲突就发生在当下。当你按照事件发生的顺序而非从整体去看待这场战争时，它确实能让你对战争有全新的认识。
WWII: In the second World war it purely came down to tactics. While the French and English were relatively evenly match against the Germans, both sides had very different plans for the war. The English and French had envisioned another WWI. With both sides slugging it out in the trenches again. Meanwhile, the Germans had every intention to avoid that outcome and smash the other side as quickly as possible. Thus, the Blitzkrieg. Another deciding factor was how either side dispersed their tanks.
The English and French saw the Tank PURELY as an Infantry support vehicle or bunker buster. They dispersed their tanks in very small groups in Infantry regiments.
The Germans knew the real power of the Tank and created Entire Panzer divisions designed to concentrate and smash through a small part of the Front line then drive on into the support areas in the rear while Infantry (and Mechanized Infantry), attached to the panzer division would secure what the Panzers passed by.
This enabled the Germans to steamroll small groups of French and English tanks (during the invasion.) This also prevented the Allies from forming a well organized counter to the Panzer Division.
第二次世界大战：在二战中，（法国的失利）纯粹是战术层面的问题。尽管法国和英国在兵力上与德国相对势均力敌，但双方的作战计划却截然不同。英法两国预想的是又一场类似一战的战争，双方会再次在战壕里浴血奋战。与此同时，德国却一心想要避免这种结果，力求尽快击溃对方，于是“闪电战”应运而生。另一个决定性因素是双方部署坦克的方式。
英法两国仅将坦克视为步兵支援车辆或碉堡摧毁武器，他们将坦克以非常小的规模分散部署在步兵团中。
而德国人深知坦克的真正威力，他们组建了完整的装甲师，其设计用途就是集中力量突破前线的某个薄弱环节，然后向后方的支援区域推进，同时隶属于装甲师的步兵（和机械化步兵）会巩固坦克部队经过的区域。
这使得德国人在入侵期间能够轻松击溃英法两国的小规模坦克部队，也让协约国无法组织起有效的防御来对抗德国装甲师。
James Coyne Screenwriter (2008–present) Upvoted by Christian Desaix, PhD History, Louisiana State University
詹姆斯·科因 编剧（2008年至今） 获路易斯安那州立大学历史学博士克里斯蒂安·德赛克斯点赞
N.B. I have upxed this answer after doing some more research, thanks to Eric Lalouette for pushing me to look deeper.
At the head, let me first say that you are proceeding from a flawed assumption. The French in WW1 fought magnificently. Unlike the Germans, the French and British governments were democratic, and the people did not want war, and both those countries entered the first world war with much less prepared troops than their enemies.
注：经过进一步研究，我对这个回答进行了更新，感谢埃里克·拉卢埃特促使我更深入地探究（相关历史）。
首先，我想说的是，你的提问基于一个错误的假设。法国在第一次世界大战中的表现极为出色。与德国不同，法国和英国是民主国家，两国人民都不希望发生战争，而且这两个国家参战之时，军队的准备程度远不如他们的敌人。
But, looking at the Franco-Prussian war, I think the basic issue was one of preparedness and equipment. The French were in the middle of a re-organization effort. Their main armies were undermanned, and their reserves were heavily undertrained and were often unruly conscxts according to data from the era. The Germans had a long history of conscxtion, a new wave of nationalism, and a deeply professional general staff that organized their troops far more effectively that the French. Add to this the new krupps field gun. It was a breech loading artillery piece, the French still used muzzle loading artillery. The Germans could shell the french from further away, more accurately and at a greater range of fire. This played havoc with the French, and was a taste of the way wars would be fought for the next 50 years.
The French learned their lessons well, and by the First World War, had a strong general staff, excellent artillery and until their manpower was nearly exhausted and on the verge of mutiny, they fought very well, stopping the Germans on several key occasions and saving themselves from ruin. The cost those brave Frenchmen paid would come back to haunt them a generation later.
但从普法战争来看，我认为根本问题在于准备情况和装备水平。当时法国正处于军队重组阶段，主力部队兵力不足，而且根据当时的数据记载，其预备役部队训练严重不足，士兵多为不服管教的应征者。德国则有着悠久的征兵历史，当时还掀起了新的民族主义浪潮，并且拥有高度专业化的总参谋部，部队组织效率远高于法国。此外，德国还拥有新型克虏伯野战炮，这种火炮采用后膛装填方式，而法国仍在使用前膛装填火炮。德国人能够在更远的距离上对法国军队进行炮击，不仅精度更高，射程也更广。这给法国军队造成了极大混乱，也预示了未来50年战争的作战模式。
法国很好地吸取了教训，到第一次世界大战时，已经拥有了强大的总参谋部和精良的火炮装备。在兵力几乎耗尽、士兵濒临哗变之前，法国军队的表现一直非常出色，多次在关键战役中阻挡了德军的进攻，使国家免于覆灭。然而，这些勇敢的法国人所付出的代价，在一代人之后给他们带来了困扰。
Victory proved a dangerous thing for the French in the interwar years. They tended to take the wrong lessons from the conflict, and because they took a naturally defensive position made some critical errors. In tank design, the French thought of their tanks as mobile fortresses, designing huge, powerful, but slow and limited range machines like the Char 1bis. The famous Maginot Line was unbreakable but incomplete. Some historians also point to the sense of false security the line engendered in French society, leaving them unprepared, as a society and military, for the reality of the total war to come. As a concept in the mid 20’s it took years to finance and build, but the time the first casements come on line, there is an argument to be made that it was already obsolete. Obsolete or not, the Germans avoided it totally, and when they did run into it, the line did it’s job well. It was a huge investment by the French Government, one that backfired in many ways.
在两次世界大战之间的时期，胜利对法国而言反而成了一件危险的事。他们往往从之前的战争中吸取了错误的经验教训，而且由于本能地采取防御姿态，犯了一些关键性错误。在坦克设计方面，法国将坦克视为移动的堡垒，设计出像Char 1bis（夏尔1bis）那样体积庞大、火力强劲但速度缓慢且续航能力有限的坦克。著名的马奇诺防线坚不可摧，却并不完整。一些历史学家还指出，这条防线在法国社会中催生了虚假的安全感，使得法国无论是社会层面还是军事层面，都对即将到来的全面战争缺乏准备。马奇诺防线作为20世纪20年代提出的概念，其融资和建造耗时多年，但当第一批防御工事投入使用时，有观点认为它已经过时了。无论是否过时，德国人完全避开了这条防线，而当他们确实遭遇防线时，防线也起到了应有的防御作用。这是法国政府的一项巨额投资，却在多个方面产生了适得其反的效果。
Another key component of the French defeat in 1940 is that her military just wasn’t what it had been in generations past. Expectations from her allies were reliant on her example from the first war, but France was a shell of her proud pre-1914-self in 1940. Consistent failure by the US, and the UK to maintain the Versailles Agreement had broken the safety restraints the French were relying on for their national safety. They were massively unprepared for war in 1939.
1940年法国战败的另一个关键因素是，其军队已不复往日雄风。盟国对法国的期望基于它在第一次世界大战中的表现，但1940年的法国早已不是1914年之前那个令人自豪的强国了。美国和英国一直未能维护《凡尔赛和约》的效力，这打破了法国赖以保障国家安全的制约机制，导致法国在1939年时对战争毫无准备。
By far, in my humble opinion, the biggest mistake that the French made was a failure to upgrade their communication systems between the wars. The Germans had radios in their tanks, had field communications that integrated their armies efficiently and worked as what militaries today call a ‘force multiplier’. The French used motorcycle messengers. They reacted at speeds acceptable in the first war, but wholly behind the curve in 1940. Their nearly paranoid refusal to work with their allies resulted in the disastrous miscommunication between the French and British troops, making it all too easy to drive between them and crucially for the French, get behind the main body of troops and encircle them.
在我看来，到目前为止，法国在两次世界大战之间犯下的最大错误是未能升级其通信系统。德国的坦克配备了无线电设备，其野外通信系统能高效地整合各支部队，起到了如今军方所说的“力量倍增器”的作用。而法国则依靠摩托车信使传递信息，这种反应速度在第一次世界大战中尚可接受，但在1940年已经远远落后于时代。此外，法国近乎偏执地拒绝与盟国合作，导致法英军队之间出现了严重的沟通失误，这使得德军很容易在两国军队之间撕开缺口，而对法国而言至关重要的是，德军得以绕到其主力部队后方并将其包围。
Here, the lessons of World War 1 really came back to haunt the Allies. The French government, all of them veterans of, survivors of, and witnesses to the carnage of the First World War did not have the stomach for another national blood letting. They had lost 1.1 million men in combat in the first war. For a sense of comparison, thats more deaths than the United States has seen in every war of the 20th century, combined.
That said, the units of French soldiers who fought in the line at Dunkirk, who evacuated and trained and fought with the allies in Africa, Sicily, and to liberate their homeland 5 years later, were some of the bravest men to fight in the Second World War.
We like to joke about French rifles (dropped once, never fired) or French tanks (5 gears, 1 forward, 4 in reverse) - but in realty, the French Fighting Man was, and always has been, the equal of any on the battlefield.
在此，第一次世界大战的教训确实给协约国带来了困扰。法国政府的成员要么是第一次世界大战的老兵、幸存者，要么是那场大屠杀的目击者，他们无法承受再一次的国家流血牺牲。法国在第一次世界大战的战斗中损失了110万人，相比之下，这个数字超过了美国在20世纪所有战争中死亡人数的总和。
尽管如此，在敦刻尔克前线作战、随后撤离并接受训练，之后又在非洲、西西里岛与盟国并肩作战，且在5年后参与解放祖国的法国士兵部队，是第二次世界大战中最勇敢的战斗群体之一。
我们总喜欢拿法国步枪（扔下一次，从未开过火）或法国坦克（5个档位，1个前进档，4个倒档）开玩笑，但事实上，法国士兵过去是、现在依然是战场上与任何士兵都不相上下的优秀战士。
Anthony Ames IT Contractor at Charles Schwab (2018–present)
安东尼·埃姆斯 嘉信理财公司信息技术承包商（2018年至今）
Well, in 1870 the French had clueless leaders in whom no one had any faith, and a debacle ensued. Among other things, Napoleon III grossly underestimated Prussia's ability to unify and rally Germany.
The French actually did quite well in 1914-18, considering they were up against the nastiest military machine on earth. Unfortunately, in winning they lost 20% of their young men, including many of their best potential leaders. These frightful losses cut the birth rate and drove the French into a kind of collective nervous breakdown after WWI.
So in 1940 the French were beset with a shortage of men, mediocre leadership, miserable morale, and a raging dispute between Left and Right over who was responsible for the mess. They were simply in no shape to face Germany again.
1870年时，法国的领导人昏庸无能，无人信服，一场惨败随之而来。其中，拿破仑三世严重低估了普鲁士统一和团结德国的能力。
考虑到法国在1914至1918年期间对抗的是当时世界上最凶狠的军事机器，他们的实际表现相当不错。不幸的是，虽然取得了胜利，法国却损失了20%的青年男性，其中包括许多极具潜力的未来领袖。这些惨重的损失导致法国出生率下降，并在一战后使法国陷入了一种集体性的精神崩溃状态。
因此，1940年的法国面临着兵员短缺、领导层平庸、士气低落的问题，而且左右两派还在激烈争论谁该为这一混乱局面负责。他们根本没有能力再次对抗德国。
Neil K. MacMillan Freelance writer specializing in historical subjects and criminal history.
尼尔·K·麦克米伦 专攻历史题材和犯罪史的自由撰稿人
Where do you get the idea the French were bad in all three of those wars? Yes France lost the Franco-Prussian War. They were out generaled by Von Moltke and the Prussians. France basically lost a generation of young men in World War One, but they handled themselves as well as any of the other combatants and better than some. It is easy to cast aspersions, but the majority of fighting on the Western Front took place in France and Belgium. I respectfully disagree with your assertion they were "bad" in the First World War. In the Second World War their problem was leadership. The average soldier was brave and well trained, but were poorly served by their leaders. And, let's face it, in 1940, the Germans were much better at tank warfare and integrated arms than most of the allied nations were. The Allies got better at it and didn't have to contend with their political leaders interfering with their military commanders by the way, Charles De Gaulle was actually one of the better French generals in WWII and handled his command quite competently during the French campaign of 1940.
你从哪里得出法国在这三场战争中表现都很糟糕的结论？诚然，法国输掉了普法战争，因为他们的将领在指挥上不及冯·毛奇和普鲁士人。在第一次世界大战中，法国基本上损失了一代人的青年男性，但他们的表现并不逊色于其他参战国，甚至比有些国家还要好。说三道四很容易，但西线的大部分战斗都发生在法国和比利时境内。我不认同你关于法国在第一次世界大战中“表现糟糕”的说法。在第二次世界大战中，法国的问题出在领导层。普通士兵勇敢且训练有素，却未能得到领导层的良好指挥。而且，说实话，1940年时，德国在坦克作战和诸军兵种协同作战方面的能力远超大多数协约国。后来协约国在这方面的能力有所提升，而且不必应对政治领导人对军事指挥官的干预。顺便提一句，夏尔·戴高乐实际上是二战中法国较为优秀的将领之一，在1940年的法国战役中，他对所部的指挥相当出色。
Orlando Barrios Cashier at Super-Duper Mart
奥兰多·巴里奥斯 超级超市收银员
1870: Nappy III over-reacted to a silly, snotty telegram, together with an irresponsible, hysterical press. They fought for wounded pride, not for a real grievance. The French Army was ordered to hole themselves up in their fortresses, instead of taking the initiative. Lions led by donkeys.
1914: they fought on, and fought on despite losing much of their industry, against a numerically and industrially stronger enemy. So… no, they were not bad in this one, au contraire! What are you talking about?
1940: nobody wanted another slaughter, so they were as ready as they could be… to fight the last war. De Gaulle and others, who preached a mechanized form of warfare, were ignored. Then the Third Republic panicked and ordered an ignominious surrender. Lions led by old, tired, fearful donkeys.
1870年：拿破仑三世对一封愚蠢无礼的电报反应过度，再加上媒体不负责任的狂热报道，法国为了受损的尊严而非真正的冤屈发动了战争。法国军队接到的命令是固守堡垒，而非主动出击，这可谓是“雄狮被蠢驴领导”。
1914年（第一次世界大战时期）：尽管失去了大部分工业产能，面对在兵力和工业实力上都更强大的敌人，法国人仍坚持战斗、浴血奋战。所以……不，他们在这场战争中表现并不糟糕，恰恰相反！你到底在说什么？
1940年（第二次世界大战时期）：没人想再经历一次大屠杀，所以法国尽可能地做好了准备……却仍是以应对上一场战争的方式来准备的。戴高乐等人倡导机械化作战方式，却被置之不理。随后，法兰西第三共和国陷入恐慌，下令屈辱投降，这又是“雄狮被年老、疲惫且胆怯的蠢驴领导”的一幕。
很赞 1
收藏