Richelieu fallen to the power of the kotatsu.

Before translation: Let me guess, Comma is mad about Soviet Champagne and french sheningans about TRUE champagne?

And yeah, another one succumbed to the glory of KOTATSOO.

Richelieu's Downfall....

Didn't Richelieu also get a line for New Year's in which she basically is putting off cleaning because of the kotatsu? If so... Well. It all speaks for itself more than ever.

When the port so good that the keel is now touching the seabed...

... someone call the chibis and some tugs.

rpgman1 said:

Richelieu fallen to the power of the kotatsu.

Surrender in the finest tradition.

Another one conquered by the all-grasping kotatsu!

WHEN KOTATSOO IS MASS PRODUCED..

Wait, it is.
Why Abyssal hasn't launch attack on winter while all shipgirls are docked in kotatsu?

otakubouzu said:

WHEN KOTATSOO IS MASS PRODUCED..

Wait, it is.
Why Abyssal hasn't launch attack on winter while all shipgirls are docked in kotatsu?

post #2196599

ida1 said:

post #2196599

oh yeah.
forget that.

kotatsu and orange go together like hmd and glove :D

ithekro said:

Surrender in the finest tradition.

Denmark surrendered to the Nazis in just six hours, yet nobody ever makes fun of them.

Haha, wasn't there a conversation in the comments about "real" Champange a few strips back? Senpai is watching.

Well, these are generally more ways to protect regional monopolies, and there are several of them in Europe. Balsamic vinegar is probably more justified than most, since actual 'Aceto Balsamico di Modena' is made with a particular white grape and then aged and concentrated for three years, while most things called "balsamic vinegar" are just red wine vinegar or dyed that color to mimic the flavor and color. Scotch, however, could be made in the exact same way someplace besides Scotland, and it wouldn't likely change the flavor any. (They even prefer to ship in barrels from America that held bourbon to age them in.)

In any event, there's enough of these regional monopolies that make particular parts of particular countries fairly rich off of specialties that they all mutually agree to enforce each other's claims.

JsTuCkEy said:

Denmark surrendered to the Nazis in just six hours, yet nobody ever makes fun of them.

Well there might've been a "small" difference in military power between Denmark and Germany and Danes also had a severe lack of preparations to defend against the invasion.

Gangut can RESIST KOTATSOO??!!

JsTuCkEy said:

Denmark surrendered to the Nazis in just six hours, yet nobody ever makes fun of them.

That would require the sort of people who actually believe these kinds of jokes to know that Denmark is a country.

/\/\ao said:

Gangut can RESIST KOTATSOO??!!

Gangut appreciates the kotatsu like any sane person confronted with the underinsulated iceboxes that are Japanese buildings, but her Russian blood means she at least isn't utterly enthralled by them like some of the other foreigners.

Higusan said:

Well there might've been a "small" difference in military power between Denmark and Germany and Danes also had a severe lack of preparations to defend against the invasion.

More accurate to say they had a lack of any possible way to defend themselves. There is basically no natural barriers between them and Germany, no strategic depth, and they're completely cut off from any possible help by basically the entirety of German. There was never any realistic chance to resist and so they didn't. The low countries aren't much better. So no one really rags on the Nordic and Low countries for quick capitulation because there was no other possible outcome by any rational reckoning.

France is a different matter; it had a large professional army, the population, and industry that it should have been able to put up a more effective defense. Given the ratio of population and GDP it might still be reasonably expected to loose alone, but it had Britain as an ally and together along with their colonies they had an advantage in GDP and manpower over Germany even after it's 1938 annexations.

It should have been a major struggle, if it had taken even say six months I think you'd hear few jokes, but it took six weeks. It has to be ranked as one of the most shocking and catastrophic military collapses in history. That's part of why it became so known and etched in popular history as well, it was shocking. No one expected such an unmitigated disaster, and as ever epic fails inevitably breed mockery.

Tonaris said:

Haha, wasn't there a conversation in the comments about "real" Champange a few strips back? Senpai is watching.

Aww crud, I knew there was something I forgot to ask Ido-san when I talked to him at Comiket...

(Commentary is right though, the line was hit by the full force of the wind outside.)

Tk3997 said:

More accurate to say they had a lack of any possible way to defend themselves. There is basically no natural barriers between them and Germany, no strategic depth...<snip>

Well they did put up a small fight (because of course you would, would be bad if you didn't) but in the end they did realise well enough to not fight to the bitter end.

In my earlier post I was going to say something about France but for some reason I didn't. Rest assured when you have a pretty hefty military power like France and then proceed to lose in six weeks, you are going to get mocked for it.

Higusan said:

Well they did put up a small fight (because of course you would, would be bad if you didn't) but in the end they did realise well enough to not fight to the bitter end.

In my earlier post I was going to say something about France but for some reason I didn't. Rest assured when you have a pretty hefty military power like France and then proceed to lose in six weeks, you are going to get mocked for it.

Especially after the much more spirited defense of four years back in in the First World War.

Tk3997 said:

More accurate to say they had a lack of any possible way to defend themselves. There is basically no natural barriers between them and Germany, no strategic depth, and they're completely cut off from any possible help by basically the entirety of German. There was never any realistic chance to resist and so they didn't. The low countries aren't much better. So no one really rags on the Nordic and Low countries for quick capitulation because there was no other possible outcome by any rational reckoning.

France is a different matter; it had a large professional army, the population, and industry that it should have been able to put up a more effective defense. Given the ratio of population and GDP it might still be reasonably expected to loose alone, but it had Britain as an ally and together along with their colonies they had an advantage in GDP and manpower over Germany even after it's 1938 annexations.

It should have been a major struggle, if it had taken even say six months I think you'd hear few jokes, but it took six weeks. It has to be ranked as one of the most shocking and catastrophic military collapses in history. That's part of why it became so known and etched in popular history as well, it was shocking. No one expected such an unmitigated disaster, and as ever epic fails inevitably breed mockery.

The quick loss was also due France had an high and mighty feeling after winning the WW1 and didn't fully mobilized his army, while nazi germany did. Also they had better equipment. Germany start relying on tanks while France/GB still relied heavily on cavs.

Tk3997 said:

It should have been a major struggle, if it had taken even say six months I think you'd hear few jokes, but it took six weeks. It has to be ranked as one of the most shocking and catastrophic military collapses in history. That's part of why it became so known and etched in popular history as well, it was shocking. No one expected such an unmitigated disaster, and as ever epic fails inevitably breed mockery.

It's worth pointing out that much of England and France's material wealth and resources came from oversees, while Germany's was centralized (due to having lost most of what few colonies it had during WW1). On paper, the UK had more economic might, but that was spread across Canada, Australia, India, Egypt (through whose Suez Canal all the oil needed to fight a long war was passing), South Africa, and a lot of other parts of Africa. France was in a similar boat. Whenever people talk about how Germany couldn't have possibly won because they had such a resource and industrial disadvantage... well, it doesn't matter if you can't get to it because someone blitzkrieged across your supply lines.

If France could have held out 6 months, that "the war's conclusion was inevitable because attrition" would have kicked in much sooner, and the war would probably have been over in its first year or two, likely before Russia or America would even get involved. (After all, 6 months was what it took for Japan to go from unchecked conquest of the Pacific to Midway.)

NWSiaCB said:

Balsamic vinegar is probably more justified than most, since actual 'Aceto Balsamico di Modena' is made with a particular white grape and then aged and concentrated for three years, while most things called "balsamic vinegar" are just red wine vinegar or dyed that color to mimic the flavor and color

That's rather disgusting.

NWSiaCB said:

It's worth pointing out that much of England and France's material wealth and resources came from oversees, while Germany's was centralized (due to having lost most of what few colonies it had during WW1). On paper, the UK had more economic might, but that was spread across Canada, Australia, India, Egypt (through whose Suez Canal all the oil needed to fight a long war was passing), South Africa, and a lot of other parts of Africa. France was in a similar boat. Whenever people talk about how Germany couldn't have possibly won because they had such a resource and industrial disadvantage... well, it doesn't matter if you can't get to it because someone blitzkrieged across your supply lines.

If France could have held out 6 months, that "the war's conclusion was inevitable because attrition" would have kicked in much sooner, and the war would probably have been over in its first year or two, likely before Russia or America would even get involved. (After all, 6 months was what it took for Japan to go from unchecked conquest of the Pacific to Midway.)

The old saying that Germany was A Dwarf fighting Three Giants comes to mind.

On the other hand, forgetting the nazi crap, they had to fight the world right then, otherwise they would have been crushed without a fight anyway.

Tk3997 said:

More accurate to say they had a lack of any possible way to defend themselves. There is basically no natural barriers between them and Germany, no strategic depth, and they're completely cut off from any possible help by basically the entirety of German. There was never any realistic chance to resist and so they didn't. The low countries aren't much better. So no one really rags on the Nordic and Low countries for quick capitulation because there was no other possible outcome by any rational reckoning.

France is a different matter; it had a large professional army, the population, and industry that it should have been able to put up a more effective defense. Given the ratio of population and GDP it might still be reasonably expected to loose alone, but it had Britain as an ally and together along with their colonies they had an advantage in GDP and manpower over Germany even after it's 1938 annexations.

It should have been a major struggle, if it had taken even say six months I think you'd hear few jokes, but it took six weeks. It has to be ranked as one of the most shocking and catastrophic military collapses in history. That's part of why it became so known and etched in popular history as well, it was shocking. No one expected such an unmitigated disaster, and as ever epic fails inevitably breed mockery.

And the same army with all its allies, colonies and vassal lose to a bunch of farmers who had barely a fragment of what French has in term of everything.

And they lose so hard, the American needed to pull all stop to help the French limb their loser ass back before thing get even worse.

PhoenixG said:

The quick loss was also due France had an high and mighty feeling after winning the WW1 and didn't fully mobilized his army, while nazi germany did. Also they had better equipment. Germany start relying on tanks while France/GB still relied heavily on cavs.

"high and mighty".
If you ever came to France, leave Paris and the big city and visit small village. Each one has his own WWI memorial with hundred of name, and that's just the dead, not the injuried, orphan, etc. Back in 1939 each family have suffered loss from WWI, she was the "der des der", last of the last war, It took away too much men and a big part of our country was destroyed (not like Germany or England). French where afraid of war back in the earliest month of WWII, and I gess Belgian would have fell the same.

On the other hand, the French army WAS NOT prepared. Richelieu and Jean Bart weren't finished, we didn't get enough plane, and our tank lacked good radio (B1 bis with morse system...) When german fought in shirt, french soldier have to wear wool-coat, and logistic was a mess (especialy about transport). Even with this the french soldier fought (battle of Stonne, screw your "better german equipement", Dunkerque), but can't win against modern tactic.

I know US citizen like to laugh about French army after 2003 and the Irak invasion, but at least be honnest when you talk about thing you didn't know.

PhoenixG said:

Germany start relying on tanks while France/GB still relied heavily on cavs.

Ahahahaha nope. France had plenty of tanks, some even better than what the Germans fielded. The Germans just had better armor doctrine.

You're probably confusing France with Poland. Well, the Memetic Poland anyway, who allegedly charged German tanks with their cavalry and get massacred with impunity (obviously, utter horseshit).

IMO, most of the blame of the surrender falls squarely on the French government, not the army. The army and the people continued to fight until liberation. Free French forces, the Foreign Legion and the Resistance played pivotal roles in the war while the government rocked between appeasement and collaboration.

but also as the saying goes the French forgot how to make things scary

Tapper said:

IMO, most of the blame of the surrender falls squarely on the French government, not the army. The army and the people continued to fight until liberation. Free French forces, the Foreign Legion and the Resistance played pivotal roles in the war while the government rocked between appeasement and collaboration.

Petain was anti-Republican, or more like he hated the Third Republic, born from the defeat of 1870. He is one of the politics who decided to skimp on the military budget between WWI and WWII, he was one of the biggest supporters of the Maginot Line opposing one of the most vocal support of a new tank doctrine.... De Gaulle (The disaster of June 1940 and how German used tanks more or less proved De Gaulle was right). And various more things could be said about the role of Petain in France's spectacular collapse.

So when Raynaud gave powers to Petain when everything got desperate, guess what would happen next. Its like being the coach of a boxer, seeing your dude losing then give the command to the other coach who just hated the boxer's guts and will throw the towel when the time comes.

Asteriaphoenix said:

On the other hand, the French army WAS NOT prepared. Richelieu and Jean Bart weren't finished, we didn't get enough plane, and our tank lacked good radio (B1 bis with morse system...) When german fought in shirt, french soldier have to wear wool-coat, and logistic was a mess (especialy about transport). Even with this the french soldier fought (battle of Stonne, screw your "better german equipement", Dunkerque), but can't win against modern tactic.

The greatest error of France was to think that Pétain fought the germans as he did at Verdun but he wasn't the shadow of the general he was during WWI.
For all the guys who laugh at us and treat us of cowards, inform yourself about Saumur's Cadets or the Alpes' Army who stop the Italians during the France Battle until Germans attack them in the back.
At Maginot line after the end of fight ordre given by the traitor,main bunkers continue to fight despite the resignation of their officers.