Dunkirk "historical movie" not diverse enough?

Glad to see you understand you cannot support your claim.
As per the norm.

 

You have done nothing to show that -any- of these black troops were at Dunkirk.
But, you know this.

 

Further proof you cannot support your claim.
But, to answer your question:
The French army was not racially integrated; the "black" troops you mention are French Colonial troops that served in Africa.
It is -possible- that a unit of these colonial troops was part of the French 1st Army at Dunkirk, but you have done nothing to show this was indeed the case.

 

I have nothing invested in the absence of black troops. I'm only interested in the historical record. For you to argue, "Why would they NOT have been among the 130,000 French troops evacuated..." is simply speculation of "alternative facts."

But I'm curious..Why would you think I would be invested in there being no blacks involved in the evacuation of Dunkirk?

 

FWIW you didn't miss much the movie fell short of expectations.

With that said, Scarlotte Johansen (and Bale,Crow,Gyllenhaal) are the reason's I watched all 4 movies you mentioned, not because they had a properly "ethnic" cast.

This thread reminds me of the 15 seconds of outrage over Taylor Swift's video shot in africa that was "too white" fortunately that outrage disappeared quickly and this one is a joke.

 

i'll chime in on that one....

I can't name a single japanese actress, not one.

I googled the top 10 most famous japanese actresses, and only recognized two, the widow in last samauri, and the chick in tokyo drift. (honorable mention to the schoolgirls in two of the karate kid movies)

 

Historical accuracy was not exactly evident in a movie that had almost no French troops being evacuated from DK when in actuality one in 3 was French ...but that doesn't seem to bother you at all.

Your main complaint seems to have to do with color. That's YOUR problem

Considering the make up of the French Army and the number of blacks in that force...it would be surprising if no blacks were among those evacuees. And in light of the fact that a large number of black French POWs were executed by the Germans...if they WEREN'T among those 130,000, that in itself is an "issue".

 

Wrong as always

Battle for France (May-June 1940)
Colonial troops fought with destinction in the Battle for France.

German Attrocities (May-June 1940)
The Germans depised the French colonial troops for largely racial reasons. The French had used colonial troops to occupy the Rhineland (1920s) which the Germans particularly resented. Before and after the French surrender, the Germans behaved barbarically toward the colonial soldiers. There were numerous incidents of the Germans killing captured colonial troops. One such incident occured at Aubigny (May 24-2 where after suffering heavy lossess, the Germans killed woundened Senegalese. (Senegalese was a term often used for black colonial troops in general.) There were several other such incidents. There were several incidents of the Germans separating captured black colonial soldiers from white soldiers and shooting them. Wehrmacht units had no orders to kill black prisoners. These incidents seem to have resulted from a historically based racism. [Scheck] As far as we can determine, most occurred close to the battlefield. Often the shooting was done in the presence of white French sholdiers and the incidents are well documented. Estimates suggest that the Germans murdered several thousand mostly black colonial troops.

 

I love how you take joy in you biting off your nose to spite your face. Really. Please continue.
I said:
It is -possible- that a unit of these colonial troops was part of the French 1st Army at Dunkirk, but you have done nothing to show this was indeed the case.
You have done nothing to address this.

 

Talking out of both sides of you mouth does NOT make you "half right".

 

It is -possible- that a unit of these colonial troops was part of the French 1st Army at Dunkirk, but you have done nothing to show this was indeed the case.
You have done nothing to address this.

 

The new name should be "Band of Transgenders"

 

In any case YOU have shown that you are dead wrong about blacks in the French Army.

There's THAT

 

It is -possible- that a unit of these colonial troops was part of the French 1st Army at Dunkirk, but you have done nothing to show this was indeed the case.
You have done nothing to address this.

 

This diminishes those still questioning their sexuality. How intolerant of you.

 

sorry about that.....

How about "Band of those who don't know which bathroom to use"?

 

That works for me.

 

Did you forget that you made THIS claim?

The French army was not racially integrated; the "black" troops you mention are French Colonial troops that served in Africa.

 

It is -possible- that a unit of these colonial troops was part of the French 1st Army at Dunkirk, but you have done nothing to show this was indeed the case.
You have done nothing to address this.

 

So you just blow past your bogus claims as usual.

 

Unsurprisingly you do not understand this fully addresses the issue you present (in an effort to cover for the fact you cannot support what YOU said)

It is -possible- that a unit of these colonial troops was part of the French 1st Army at Dunkirk.
But you have done nothing to show this was indeed the case.

Thus, your claims and criticisms are unsupportable nonsense.
As per the norm.

 

You are the one who keeps bringing up color. It's more than weird that you think that's my "complaint." Why would you think I would be invested in there being no blacks involved in the evacuation of Dunkirk? Or have any sort of interest in it other than history? What have I posted in this thread that leads you to that frankly bizarre conclusion?

The movie itself addressed the French evacuation. It also didn't show all 400,000 soldiers trying to evacuate, or address the situation of transgendered troops waiting evacuation. Your complaints are not just bizarre, they're absurd.