MetaChat - I just corrected the New York Times.

MetaChat is an informal place for MeFites to touch base and post, discuss and chatter about topics that may not belong on MetaFilter. Questions? Check the FAQ. Please note: This is important.

28 May 2009

I just corrected the New York Times. →[More:] According to Left Out of D-Day Events, Queen Elizabeth Is Fuming, "French troops played no part in the June 6 landings." This was a well-meant contrast with the large number of casualties suffered by the British, to be sure, but quite inaccurate.

The Free French participation included:
* paratroopers landed in Brittany
* an entire troop (platoon) of fusiliers landed with British troops on Sword Beach, which captured a key objective (depicted in The Longest Day)
* fighter and bomber squadrons participating in the air cover
* four naval vessels providing close landing support

Then I noted that one should also consider the sacrifices of the French Resistance.

I mean, I'm not even 1% of the war geek that a few random people I know are, and I knew this.
This makes up for being interviewed about blogging about four times, and never getting a single mention. HA!

post by: dhartung at: 02:12 | 14 comments

Impressive! Good work

posted by BoringPostcards 28 May | 06:53

And doesn't supplying the venue also count for something?

posted by Meatbomb 28 May | 07:23

you forgot "handed out croissants and cafe au lait"

posted by desjardins 28 May | 07:57

Nice work, dhartung. The Old Grey Lady often needs an editor.

The ridiculous disdain Americans often feel for the French (and which frequently poisons WWII remembrances, at least in the American press) is a shameful way to act towards our oldest ally. On the same token, why should we give a shit what the monarch of our first enemy thinks? Okay, I was just kidding about the second part, but really the whole "surrender monkeys" thing is ignorance and stupidity of the lowest order.

Not that that's really going on here in this article, but I can't help but think such misinformation and poor research is due to this kind of ugly misplaced chauvinism.

posted by Hugh Janus 28 May | 08:54

Ironic that we use a French word to describe that.

posted by lysdexic 28 May | 09:08

According to this chart, I can pull out an "Oh Snap!" for this one.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 28 May | 10:39

Looks like the article was corrected ... by removing the line. Fine by me!

Meatbomb, touché!

By the way, there were Vichy troops around, but for the most part the coastal defenses were manned by German troops ... largely from the Eastern occupied lands including Poland. The Germans didn't trust the French, but the impressed troops weren't much better in the event.

posted by dhartung 28 May | 11:33

I hope you used the correct format:

~~French troops played no part in the June 6 landings.~~

FTFY.

posted by mullacc 28 May | 11:40

Wow, that's pretty cool, dhartung. Good catch.

posted by LoriFLA 28 May | 12:01

War Nerd - The Truth About The French

posted by The Whelk 28 May | 13:44

I'm french-kissing everyone in this thread.

No, yeah - seriously cool. I agree with the Janus.

posted by taz 28 May | 17:08

But... but... Cheese eating surrender monkeys is such a good insult. Do we really want to lose it? Who else can we apply it to if we let the French off the hook?

posted by deborah 28 May | 18:32

The US wouldn't exist without France's help.

As the War Nerd points out, France lost 1.5 million men out of a total population of 40 million. US military deaths in WWI: 116,708. The estimated current US population is just over 300 million, so the equivalent loss would be about 11.25 million (if my math is correct, which is probably isn't).

posted by kirkaracha 28 May | 19:07

Who else can we apply it to if we let the French off the hook?

≡ Click to see image ≡

posted by Hugh Janus 28 May | 21:19

← Poodle exercise with humans || Rooftop Farm in Brooklyn →

HOME || REGISTER || LOGIN