Macron's plan to pay tribute to Nazi collaborator Pétain stirs anger

[Mike Hunt]

Stalin was very anti Semitic, yes, but a lot of his anti antisemitism came about due to his power struggle with Trotsky ( a jew) and his dislike of Zinoviev and Kamenev, ( both jewish) who were all part of the left opposition within the party. his antisemitic tendencies only really flared up later in his life though.
Sources:
Stalin: Court of the Red Tsar by Montefiore
Stalin by Dimitri Volkgonokov

[IlluminatiRex]

Dude the idea that French generals were dumb is just as prevalent, while the specific phrase I am mentioning is more Anglocentric, the idea it represents isn't.
No I haven't, point out "which questions I've avoided answering" then. I can point to literally everything you haven't addressed in my posts however:

onto the next bit
What are you even on about here. Like, why is it this crime to you that the commemoration should be factually accurate? what exactly would be wrong with being accurate in the memorial services? Like how is it this world ending thing that you be accurate when paying respect???
and I've actually demonstrated how this is but a small part of a much larger series of commemoration events and they aren't "deserving of more respect than the common foot soldier". Let's look at some more of the specifics from this tour, shall we?

He will move on to the ridge at Les Éparges, in the Meuse, where 12,000 French and Germans died between February and April 1915, with neither side taking any territory. The first World War author Maurice Genevoix survived the Battle of Les Éparges and wrote a book about it. Macron will announce his “Pantheonisation”.
At Verdun, the French president will visit the Douaumont ossuary, which holds the bones of 130,000 of the more than 300,000 French and Germans who perished there in 1916.
At Reims, Macron will be joined by the president of Mali, Ibrahim Boubacar Keita. They will pay homage to African troops from French colonies who defended Reims in 1918. About 30,000 of the 200,000 Africans who fought for France were killed.

And according to this other article

Macron will also host ceremonies on the battlefields across the country where hundreds of thousands of men died in muddy trenches during long stalemates between the Allies and German forces.

Not to mention, a big part of this tour was meeting with local people, so I'm more than confidant that would have involved a lot of personal stories about their family's involvement in the war.

So those "ordinary soldiers" you care so much about in the fact of this article, are getting just as much, if not more, respect.

What logic is that exactly? Because that's not what I've been saying. What I have been saying is that Macron has been doing a variety of commemorations on his tour, and that the Marshals were only a small part of it, it's not like they're the whole show mate. And thus, it's not really that big of a deal, and maybe will go a bit towards changing people's minds because now is when there is an audience and people are paying attention. People learning something is a side-effect of being accurate, which is something I don't think you've grasped. Just to illustrate what my point has been this whole time:

next bit
And how many people actually understand that? The prevailing myth for all of the nations is that the generals were "stupid" and "out of touch". Even in France, yes, this is a myth (And that's not to say the leadership didn't make mistakes or was perfect, far from it), it's not exclusive to the Anglosphere. Haig, Foch, Ludendorff, Pershing, Hunter-Weston, etc... With the exception of maybe Von Lettow-Vorbeck the generals are regarded as stupid (but there's a whole lot of myths around him and he was actually pretty awful). It is the centenary of the war, it makes perfect sense to make their role in it known. And if as a part of that people start to change their minds about the generals being a monolithic block of "stupid", all the better.
see my response above. It's the centenerary of the war that they helped win, and talking a bit about them during it is not a crime.
And I disagree. They were just as much part of the war as anyone else, and had a major role in its conclusion. It's not misplaced, it's the exact time to make mention of their role since it is the centenary of the war's victory and end.

[AxeI]

It seems you still don't get what I'm trying to get across here, as you keep garnishing your posts with tons of digressions that have nothing to do with my point, or repeatedly beat me over the head with stuff I'm already aware of.

I don't really see the use in repeating my point once again, especially since I'm frankly unsure you're genuinely interested in understanding it. If you actually are then you should have all the material required for that already anyway.

[AxeI]

Right, figured as much. If you were interested in actual discussion you wouldn't have constructed strawmen instead of arguing against my actual point. Keep playing dressup and ignore the symbolic aspects of those memorials. Couldn't care less about some American dumbass's lack of insight over matters that concern the French.