which country was more cowardly during ww2?

france or chinawhich country was more cowardly during ww2?
*facepalm*do you have any idea how many french and chinese were killed during WW2? which country was more cowardly during ww2?
oh god...don't even remind me about china during ww2....the things that japan did to them are horrendous....
Huh?French and China weren't really on the offensive against Germany and Japan, true, but I'm pretty sure that wasn't because of cowardice. :| Then again, I don't really know all that much about WW2.
[QUOTE=''Cloud_Insurance'']*facepalm*do you have any idea how many french and chinese were killed during WW2? [/QUOTE] Military deaths:217,600 -France+ 3,800,000 -china= 4,017,600 France is the correct answer
France, easily, all those oppurtunities they had to knock Hitler on his ass before Germany could finish rearming went to waste all because they were too afraid to take any preventative action against aggression. Same goes for Neville Chamberlain as well.
France due to their actions after WWI blaming the entire war on the German Empire which really, they just got sucked into like everyone else...they never really were on the offensive during the first WW.



So in turn I actually blame World War II on France for being righteous little twerps, the british for cutting the trans-atlantic telegraph lie and the whole Zimmermann-gram. I blame the Americans for lying through their teeth like they always do just to put on face(if you can't handle the heat for your actions, don't lie about them, just don't do it) where the americans, Wilson specifically where he vowed to not support either side, later they said only moniairily they were going to support each side equally...well that worked for almost 10 minutes until america started sending over ammunitions and like 20x the money which germany was receiving to the british...
Silly flamewar bait thread, so I'm just going to post the answer that popped into my head when I read the thread subject line and say ''Germany.''
Yes, being unable to stand against military juggernauts = cowardice :roll:
[QUOTE=''Tiefster'']Yes, being unable to stand against military juggernauts = cowardice :roll:[/QUOTE]In France's case, yes, seeing as they allowed Germany to rearm before actually doing anything about it. 
Why China? :
|My beloved Sweden!We supplied iron to Hitler to keep him from invading our country, we even had some nazi political parties going. Actually, the nazi..system was getting pretty big in Sweden until Hitler began to lose.Then we switched side, supply iron to the Allies and the nazi's in Sweden were long gone. *sigh*
[QUOTE=''lennyh'']france or china[/QUOTE]

They were two of the most affected :
|well it has to be France out of the 2 there cock up at the beginning of the war saw the war last another 5 years longer than it should have if the French had have held the Germans at the Maginot Line that would have given the British enough time to raise an Army large enough to push the Germans back into Germany .
[QUOTE=''Lonelynight'']Why China? :|[/QUOTE] i was wondering that as far as I'm aware the Japanese massacred millions of Chinese people and China was in know fit state to fight back due to the fact that it wasn't really a united country at the time id have put Italy on there instead of China reason being Italy was just a big liability to Germany .
[QUOTE=''snakes_codec''][QUOTE=''Lonelynight'']Why China? :|[/QUOTE] i was wondering that as far as I'm aware the Japanese massacred millions of Chinese people and China was in know fit state to fight back due to the fact that it wasn't really a united country at the time id have put Italy on there instead of China reason being Italy was just a big liability to Germany .[/QUOTE]With that reasoning surely you could forgive france a little, considering that its army and infastructure was seriously dented during world war 1 (only 20 years before).My vote is going on poland for just letting germany waltz in and take the county for itself (only took 3 weeks).
[QUOTE=''AtvarU''][QUOTE=''snakes_codec''][QUOTE=''Lonelynight''] [QUOTE=''AtvarU''][QUOTE=''snakes_codec''][QUOTE=''Lonelynight'']Why China? :|[/QUOTE] i was wondering that as far as I'm aware the Japanese massacred millions of Chinese people and China was in know fit state to fight back due to the fact that it wasn't really a united country at the time id have put Italy on there instead of China reason being Italy was just a big liability to Germany .[/QUOTE]With that reasoning surely you could forgive france a little, considering that its army and infastructure was seriously dented during world war 1 (only 20 years before).My vote is going on poland for just letting germany waltz in and take the county for itself (only took 3 weeks). [/QUOTE] Didn't they had a strong resistence against the Germans once they were conquered?
Didn't Denmark surrender to a German motorcyclist?
[QUOTE=''DucksBrains''][QUOTE=''Tiefster'']Yes, being unable to stand against military juggernauts = cowardice :roll:[/QUOTE]In France's case, yes, seeing as they allowed Germany to rearm before actually doing anything about it. [/QUOTE] Maginot lines.
 Arn't resistances just a very small army, not enough to really fight. From memory (correct me if im wrong) didn't the resistance mainly just gather information for the british and americans, so they could fight the germans. And sabatage things.