i guess im randomly asking but does someone know a tool to get back into an instagram account?? I stupidly lost the password. I love any assistance you can offer me
@Raylan Camden I really appreciate your reply. I found the site through google and im trying it out now. Takes quite some time so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@@michaeldavis4651 On History Channel, USA/UK have won the hundred years war, Joan of Ark was british or american but surely not french as everyone in anglosphere knows they are CESM, cowards which always surrender. :D
"What's 2+2?" WAR "Oh no, we're out of stew, could you make some more?" I'll make some WAR "This party is such a bore..." Don't worry, i'll make it a WAR
Clémenceau is also very well-known for his sharp mind. We got a lot of sayings coming from him. "War is such a serious thing, that it shouldn't be handled by the army" is one of them, although the translation is not very good
Also regarding Foch and his appointment as Commander-in-Chief of the Allied armies in 1918, it is said that he was preferred over the "more cautious" Pétain (some said even defeatist) because of his perseverance and spirit at the Doullens conference. Especially because of one of his statement in front of all the other generals and deleguates : "You aren't fighting? I would fight without a break. I would fight in front of Amiens. I would fight in Amiens. I would fight behind Amiens. I would fight all the time. I would never surrender" When the time will come, it would be interesting to have a special about him too.
Hey Indy, by any chance did he yell "your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries" when he was taunting the Germans on the front lines?
Indy, this is brilliant. I studied History in University and could never draw such an accurate portrait of Clemenceau. Congrats on another superb episode of the Great War.
In 1919 a low-life anarchist (sorry for being redundant) tried to kill Clemenceau. Afterwards, Georges "The Tiger" commented: "We have just won the most terrible war in history, yet here is a Frenchman who misses his target 6 out of 7 times at point-blank range. Of course this fellow must be punished for the careless use of a dangerous weapon and for poor marksmanship. I suggest that he be locked up for eight years, with intensive training in a shooting gallery." What a guy!
"Ne craignez jamais de vous faire des ennemis; si vous n'en avez pas, c'est que vous n'avez rien fait." "Don't be afraid of making enemies; if you don't have any, it is because you made nothing." Georges Clémenceau (Sorry for the bad translation^^)
Such an interesting and complex figure, flaws and paradoxes but so many forces. The way he got convinced of Alfred Dreyfus innocence and then defended him - I think, and I could be wrong, he was a journalist at that time - is highly emblematic in my humble opinion. And such a moustache! Thank you very much Indy and Baptiste
As usual, an outstanding video. Great dialogue, delivery, production values, and finding those historic film and pictures. Wow, you guys are amazing and proud to be a Patreon of THE GREAT WAR. I never had much interest in WW1 (though lots of interest in WW2 till you guys came along).
Stupid decision to stop Franchet d'Espèrey and the other allies on the oriental front whilst he was ready, willing and able to get to Germany... Also the way they negotiated the Treaty of Versailles in addition to this above-mentioned gross mistake (we should have made it clear to Germany that they had lost the war to the point of reaching and occuying their territory) was an horrible mistake we payed dearly later and even arguably to this day...
Honestly, it's too bad nobody started a centennial history website or TV channel or something in 2000, it'd be neat to rehash the events of the entire 20th century week by week.
6 лет назад
Indy already does the Cuban Missile Crisis on another channel. See this video and the entire channel: watch?v=AKOgqsuHa28
man those "le petit journal" illustrations always go so hard. I especially like the one depicting the miracle on the Marne. Would be cool to hang some up if someone makes them.
Sidenote: Mary Plummer Clemenceau was the grandniece of Nathan Hale. I personally met some of his descendants and even met the great-grandson of Czar Nicholas II 's doctor.
Churchill was an admirer of Clemenceau actually. He was present in 1918 when the germans launched their offensive toward Paris and Clemanenceau made this speech: "They can take Paris, it won't end the war. We will fight behind the Seine, we will fight behind the Loire, we will fight behind the Garonne, we will fight in the Pyreneans, and if they take it, we will fight at sea, but we will never surrender" Reminds you of another speech?^^
How far into the Post-war era is this channel going to cover? I absolutely love your production, and I just realized that the story of the great war ends 11 months, 1 day from now.
Indeed. It happened to Churchill directly following WWII as well, he was replaced by Clement Attlee but then won the election after Attlee's term was up.
I've been reading more recent work on Gallipoli that places more responsibility for the Entente disaster there on Kitchener than on Churchill. Worth looking into.
The talent for witty phrases and the exemplar leadership in a World War drive us to an inevitable comparison with Winston Churchill. Churchill himself, in his book 'Great Contemporaries' (1937), wrote a short and complimentary biography of Clemenceau.
Well, they both were sassy old politicians that led the Allies to victory during the World Wars. Also, they both took power when the situation was looking quite grim for their country, but still stubbornly carried on. By the way, it's not impossible that Churchill's "We shall fight on the beaches" speech was inspired by one of Clemenceau's in front of the French parliament when the German army got extremely close to Paris in 1918.
The parallels struck me too. From power to the political wilderness, called back when his nation decided that they needed him after all, acted as his own War Minister (Defence Secretary), loses the post war election, writes his own history. Clemenceau could be Monsieur Churchill, MD. Or, rather, Churchill could be the English Clemenceau, since Clemenceau's experience predates the equivalent portion of Churchill's life.
One of Churchill's opponents referred to him as something like a stone headed rabid dog. But the stone headed rabid dog England needed. France needed a Clemenceau at the time. A nationalist who truly believed that the survival of France was on the line.
I was struck by the rise, fall and rise again of Clemmanu and that of Churchill in WWII. Also Indy's description of his character being just right for a war time leader but maybe not peace similar to Churchill.
He also made a similar statement to Churchill's famous "Fight on the Beaches" speech. "The Germans may take Paris, but that will not prevent me from going on with the war. We will fight on the Loire, we will fight on the Garronne, we will fight even in the Pyrenees. And if at last we are driven off the Pyrenees, we will continue the war at sea."
I remember the comment he made after the Treaty of Versailles was signed in 1919. He said it was only a truce and Germany and France would be fighting again in 20 years.
Frank E McGillivray I believe it was Field Marshal Ferdinand Foch who said that, not Clemenceau. I could be wrong about that, so don't quote me on that.
Mike Brammer exactly, French Maréchal Ferdinand Foch said "ce n'est pas une paix, c'est un armistice de 20 ans"/"this is no peace, it is a 20 year armistice".
The topic is that Clemenceau didn't want peace with Germany. He critized the Versailles Treaty as too moderate. He didn't care that his attitude helped the far right in Germany to rise and to demand revenge.
@@rudolfkraffzick642 If he had his way, Germany would have ended like Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman empire, which I think we can agree have not been bad bois since then.
I love that the expertise of viewer fans is utilized in the various special episodes. Indy and crew may not know it, but they are the model for future pedagogical regimens, totally democratized globally. The Great War should become a lecture bloc for university classes in 20th century European history.
A great man that held the Entente later Allies together. In spite of the myths he was somewhat lenient towards Germany , and if the terms of Versailles had been more rigourously enforced , in terms of reparations payments and from the remilitisation of the Rhineland,who knows? Inspite of both world wars Krupp , Siemens , Bosch, successors of IG Farben and Daimler Benz are still live and well . What reparations?
Indy, I know I'm quite early, but could you in the future make an episode on the misconceptions about the Treaty of Versailles ? I read all days so much partial and biased comments on the Internet about that. Many people think it's the main cause of WW2 when the reality is so much more complex...
Great video, as usual. But I'm confused as to what the role of "Prime Minister" in the French Republic of the time actually entailed. It doesn't seem to be the equivalent of the British Prime Minister as there is also a French elected President. What it boils down to is this - where did the real power lie?
Actually, at the time of the third republic, the French Prime Minister's office is pretty comparable to the English one, while the President would be akin to the King/Queen of England: the official head of state, but little real power. What makes it confusing is that nowaday, it's very much the reverse: under the fifth republic, the President holds the real power, while the Prime Minister is a more subordinate position (most of the time - if the President and the Prime Minister happens to be from different political parties, then there's some balance between them)
I have just stumbled onto your channel and am very impressed. I was wonder what is your motivation for doing this great undertaking? I got to ep 44 this evening and will pick it up with 45 tomorrow evening.. What got my attention was the episode you did on the somme (the third one) My grand father started his service in ww1 in that battle.. after I left the marines in 1972 we talk for many days of war.. he told me about that battle and many others he fought in until he was wounded. He passed on three years later in 1975.. he was a great man.. they don't seem to make them like him any more.. thanks for what your doing.. it reminds me of him..
His most knowned allocution was in the parlement when he was talking about general Lyautey : here's an admirable man, courageous who had balls even if not always his !! (In french : "voilà un homme admirable, courageux, qui a toujours eu des couilles aux cul ... même quand ça n'était pas les siennes")
@@princekareem6872 elle n’était pas supposé mais réelle. Lyautey n’est jamais abordé mais il a eu un rôle essentiel dans l’organisation des armées françaises en tant que ministre de la guerre.
@The Great War. Something I find interesting that I hope you cover more in depth in your regular videos is how Clemenceau's government feuded with Loyd George over replacements until the Armistice, and how under his premiership, the ideology of the Sacred Union was only used by pro war papers, and was in reality dead. Thanks for covering one of my favorite people from the war.
This is excellent. I run these at 75% so as to absorb, the information and help me stop it in time to look at the photos. Apparently, Clemenceau was an overall positive for France, at least before the war. I was unaware of Mary Plummer his wife, and am looking her up at this time. The French Revolution and Liberalism is responsible for all of their problems, not Clemenceau as such.
Meanwhile, on wikipedia, the article for the President of France for WWII, Albert Lebrun, only has a small paragraph describing what he did, starting from 1932 and ending in 1944. He comments that he was still president because there was no one left to accept his resignation.
Clemenceau was Prime Minister, not President. The President of the Third Republic had relatively little political influence and was largely a ceremonial office. And Lebrun (in WW2) had essentially been deposed by Petain in 1940; him not resigning was more a technicality.
Being American, I am unfamiliar with the power structure of the French Republic. If the Presidency was worthless why did Clemenceau make a Presidential bid? And why does the WWI President, Raymond Poincaré, have a Wikipedia article 20 times longer then Albert Lebrun?
In most democracies, the Prime Minister is the important executive post, and the President a largely ceremonial head of state (think British queen.) However, the prestige of the person and position, plus their power to dissolve governments, can give rise to influential individuals.
The Presidency did not hold much power, but was a very prestigious office, so it was not rare for very influencial politicans, such as Clemenceau and Poincaré to end their career as president. They would not hold much official power, but their influence and prestige would still allow them to have an impact on French politics. As for why Poincaré is much more remembered than Lebrun, I believe it's because Lebrun became president without having held very high positions before, unlike Poincaré who has had a long career as MP, minister and prime minister. Also, Poincaré was president during the entirety of WWI while Lebrun was deposed as soon as 1940 when the French Republic fell. An other reason might be the intense rivalry between Poincaré and Clemenceau : being the rival of someone as famous as "the Tiger", and being the target of some of his most sassy comments, is certainly a way to gain fame. "There are only two perfectly useless things in this world. One is an appendix and the other is Poincaré", Clemenceau 1919
Those Wikipedia articles might also give a hint: "The strong-willed Poincaré was the first president of the Third Republic since MacMahon in the 1870s to attempt to make that office into a site of power rather than an empty ceremonial role," as opposed to "Re-elected in 1939, largely because of his record of accommodating all political sides, he (Lebrun) exercised little power as president." And what pimsou1 wrote - Poincaré was the more important politician in general, by far.
"One simply needs to add 'military to something to have it mean the opposite. As such, military music is not music, and military justice is not justice." - Georges Clemenceau
@@sirmeowthelibrarycat No, his cousin (I think - a family member in any case), who was the French President who made Clemenceau Prime Minister in 1917.
I hate how Clemenceau in the popular consciousness has been stereotyped as simply "the guy who was mean to Germany and therefore is more responsible for World War II than Hitler is". It's such an idiotically simple-minded way to look at history and it strips the participants in all these events of their agency. Fact is, Clemenceau was in fact LESS aggressive toward Germany during the peace conference than most major French political figures, and men such as President Poincaré and Marshals Foch and Pétain were on the verge of removing him from the negotiations due to just how much they viewed him as going soft on the Germans. That's ignoring the fact that France had plenty of good reasons for being harsh to Germany after the war, having lost millions of lives and having suffered an occupation of some of their most prosperous industrial centers for almost five years. The idea that Clemenceau and the French somehow drove Germany into the arms of Nazism just serves to whitewash the numerous people who willingly supported Hitler's rancid policies, as if they didn't have a choice in the matter.
Great show Indy I was wondering if technology was advanced enough at this time that paratrooper tactics could be employed. Do you think you would've had any impact on the war.
Yep, on the outside, but warning of problems before the war, eventually thrust into leadership, a solid, unyielding character, then voted out post-war. The similarities are remarkable.
Clémenceau was also very wright on many things. He knew before everyone else that Pétain was an incompetent commander and that this spirit of a "loser" would bring France to defeat. He said "we pushed Pétain to victory by buming his ass towards it" (On l'a poussé à la victoire à coups de pieds dans le cul) What he said about Pétain finally made sense in 1940 when Pétain considered the battle of France lost while there still was a chance of breaking the encirclement.
Pétain was not an incompetent commander. He was excellent in defense but too pessimistic for attack. He knew how not to lose a battle, but not how to win one - even more so, a war. You can't always have it all.
Pétain was a defensive commander. It was his doctrine. Use the right men, at the right place and the right men. In 1916 France needed urgently competent defensive officers. Petain was the man.
In fact Clemenceaus hateful attitude towards Germany laid the seed for all what happend from 1930 on. Sad but true. The right man for the war isn't necessarilly the best choise for making peace.
Debatable. Had he had his way with Germany, it would have become an inoffensive regional power (through dismantling). You could also argue that it was the USA's will to have as little sanctions as possible (believing that trade would make war impossible), becoming Germany's main trade partner before creating the 1929 crash that made it's way to Germany... is to blame.
Benoit Bvg entre la crise de 1929 et l’humiliation de 1919 (et qui s’est poursuivie longtemps après lorsque la France occupait la Rhénanie notamment) je crois sincèrement que l’humiliation a eu plus de conséquences que la crise
"Mr. Wilson bores me with his Fourteen Points; why, G0d Almighty has only Ten." The right man at the right time. Vive Clemenceau and Vive la France :-)
Harder conditions would not have been the right solution. Smarter ones would have done it. Ensure, that territorial disputes due to cultural groups being located in other countries are avoided and strenghten the economic dependencies between countries. That´s how you make peace. Not ruining a countries economy, let the people pretty much starve for a few years and give big chunks of their territory to other states. That is not how you ensure peace and the French despite all should have known that.
It's highly debatable that a softer treaty would have helped, though. As Italy proved, fascism could rise even in a country on the winning side, and Hitler did not take power during the harsh years just after the war, but long after that, when the country had recovered, then collapsed again for entirely different reasons. Plus, it would have been impossible to make public opinion accept softer terms. The 1871 treaty had been extremely harsh and humiliating to France, and after four years of having the whole northern regions ravaged, no-one there was in an especially merciful mood.
While you are absolutely in the right when you say that Hitler did not come to power in the years after the war, I disagree that the collapse of german economy happened for "entirely different reasons." Germany was extremely dependant on the money coming from other countries like the USA to get its enonomy going again. When they did not pay reperations the french just came and occupied the wealthiest part of their country. And when the market crashed it hit Germany harder than other countries since they were dependent on other countries. Also, yes, the 1871 treaty was extremely harsh. To my knowledge the French had to pay even more than the Germans, however that was an entirely different situation. France lost the war in 1871 rather quickly and its economy was intact for the most part. Germany after WWI was standing on its last legs. Also France lost Alsace to Germany, which was maybe wrong, but since many people there actually spoke German is at least understandable. Germany however did not only lose Alsace, it also lost a LOT of land in the east. Austria lost the southern part of Tyrol, which was, excuse me for saying this, just BS since this part of the country did not even have a stable minority of Italians. Had they listened to Wislon all this things could have been avoided. Also also most politicians did not care about public opinion when they started the war, they should at least have the guts to not care when they ended it.
Can the next WHO DID WHAT IN World War 1 be about Einstein? he might not of had a role in the war, but his name was pretty known and the war affected his life.
