[Fr3z3r]

Originally posted by ngtm1r
The French just kinda crapped out, though. They gave up before the majority of their army could even see, much less fire at, a Germany soldier. Had they actually attempted to make a fight of it, they might have won. They actually had better equipment then the Wehrmacht did at that stage.

Morale and apathy was one thing, but - again - the tactics was the key. The French relied heavily on the Maginot line. The Germans poured into France and the Allied units became disorganized very quickly.

Then the Germans broke through in Sedan area... And the rest is history. The Polish lesson was ignored - the Allies believed that the war would turn into a WWI-style fight. Short-minded (or just plain incompetent).

[NGTM-1R]

When the Germans broke through, the French just threw up their hands, though. Before there had even been a serious engagement. Tactics had nothing to do with it, they just plain didn't try to fight.

Don't knock the Maginot Line too much, either...it was used for its intended purpose in 1944, during Operation Nordwind. And it worked quite well, holding up two panzer divisions for several days.

[Fr3z3r]

Originally posted by ngtm1r
When the Germans broke through, the French just threw up their hands, though. Before there had even been a serious engagement. Tactics had nothing to do with it, they just plain didn't try to fight.

I read reports about Frech units that fought fiercely and caused Germans some serious trouble. So it's not like I have "French = coward" in my mind (a very common approach in Poland, sad to say).

Don't knock the Maginot Line too much, either...it was used for its intended purpose in 1944, during Operation Nordwind. And it worked quite well, holding up two panzer divisions for several days.

Of course, I know that episode. All I'm saying is that the Line didn't work as planned in 1940.

[Tiara]

software patent directive -> WWII

Yes, I see the connection... oh, wait...

[IceFire]

Originally posted by ngtm1r
When the Germans broke through, the French just threw up their hands, though. Before there had even been a serious engagement. Tactics had nothing to do with it, they just plain didn't try to fight.

Don't knock the Maginot Line too much, either...it was used for its intended purpose in 1944, during Operation Nordwind. And it worked quite well, holding up two panzer divisions for several days.

Thats not entirely true and completely unfair for history.

The French were spread very thin because they were not prepared.  Much like Poland was not prepared.  They were attempting to guard the most likely places for invasion and as mentioned by another poster, were hoping the Germans would throw themselves at the Maginot line (which was never completed to full realization).

The Germans intead came through the least likely location that was the most treatcherous for tanks.  But they managed it anwaysy and they encircled the Maginot line, they were able to move very quickly through the countryside...and there was just not enough RAF Hurricanes and French D.520's to hold back the Luftwaffe and their airbases were too quickly overrun.

But this does by no means indicate the French "threw up their hands and surrendered".  Absolutely proposterous...while they did fight they fought pretty hard.  Ultimately, all it did was buy a little more time for the British to evacuate to Dunkirk and launch the largest scale operation to that date of a cross channel evacuation of the BEF using ever ship, barge, tug, and plane available.  A minor victory when all the cards were essentially in Germanys favor.

[Deen]

Excuses for why a country lost a war/battle are not really a valid argument. We are all on the same planet, and all countries had to work with the situation they were in at the time.

[IceFire]

Originally posted by Deen
Excuses for why a country lost a war/battle are not really a valid argument. We are all on the same planet, and all countries had to work with the situation they were in at the time.

Thats absolutely preposterous.  Have you studied history at all?

I could write for hours on why this is wrong but consider:
- population
- social policy
- politics
- economics
- science
- focus of interest
- organization
- land size
- internal and external pressures (treaties, national politics)

The list goes on and on.  All of these have elements of why a country won or lost.  The belief that France just laid down their arms the moment a Panzer tank rolled across the border is ignorance.  I'm not arguing this because I'm french (I'm not), I'm not arguing it because I have some sort of agenda, I'm arguing it because statements here are absolutely historically false and illconcieved in the very least.

I've read innumerable source documents from the period (I've had to write essays on this stuff) mostly pertaining to the efforts of the BEF and the RAF during this time (my interest area) but that also covers significant elements of why France lost, what factors were involved, and what the timeline was.

Lets move from the Battle of France to the Battle of Britain.  Did the Luftwaffe and the RAF have the same situation because they were on the same planet?  Heck no!  The RAF was on its home front, it had fewer than 32 fighter squadrons when the battle began, the Luftwaffe outnumbered them in planes by three to one.  But what were the crucial differences?

1) Britain is an island.  Invasion by conventional means is impossible, it has to be a naval operation at some point.  Germany in the 1940's could not hope to compete with the Royal Navy.
2) Britain had developed and excellent defensive method using radar, command and control, and airfield dispersals to attack the enemy.
3) People like Lord Beaverbrook were able to rally the British industries to build fighters, repair fighters, take two damaged fighters and make one good one.  By the end of September 1940 Britain was capable of sustaining its losses in terms of planes (not pilots) while the Luftwaffe was totally unable to replace its planes (Germany did not even reach full production capacity until 1944!!).

Etc, etc, etc.

[aldo_14]

Britain not England, please.

[IceFire]

Originally posted by aldo_14
Britain not England, please.

Sorry...I end up using them interchangably even when I know the difference.  Its the English soccer jersey I'm wearing...I swear  

Fixed.

[Tiara]

IceFire;

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by IceFire

Sorry...I end up using them interchangably even when I know the difference.  Its the English soccer jersey I'm wearing...I swear  

Fixed.

Bah; what are you wearing that raggedy old tat for?

[Clave]

This is the flag of the United Kingdom - A general mish-mash of countries that's been joined together for a few years now.  



They are:

England: Obviously the centre of the known universe and bringer of civilisation to the outer reaches.  Cream teas, cricket, Shakespeare, The Beatles, yada, yada...



Scotland:  Men in skirts, invented Television and bagpipes, bringers of mayhem to the civilised world, despite being shut behind a wall by the Romans....



Wales:  Dull, dull, dull...  Well, ok they had that poet guy, Dylan Thomas.  Oh and lots of sheep live there...



Northern Ireland:  Absolutely mental!  Drinking and fighting, or fighting and drinking are the four favourite occupations.









Edit: Big space inserted here to keep people happy *sigh*







Southern Ireland aka Eire:  Just as mental as the North, but with better scenery

NB: Eire is NOT part of the UK, and has different laws, currency etc. etc.

[Gank]

Please dont put our flag in along with the rest of the UK, we fought long and hard to get out of it, the least you could do is respect that.

Originally posted by Liberator
It was a team effort, the Americans/British didn't use their troops as fodder for their tanks and it slowed them down.  Patton could've been in Berlin weeks before if he hadn't been desupplied.

I was refering to poland.

Originally posted by Kosh
The war would have lasted a lot longer if Hitler didn't take away soldiers and equipment from the eastern front. That allowed the Russians to break through the thin German lines rather easily. They were advancing 120 KM per day in some cases. It had nothing todo with the Americans/British not using their troops as fodder for their tanks. Their tanks were pieces of crap anyway.

Hitler didnt take any troops away from the eastern front to the western, unless they'd been very badly mauled and needed regrouping.

Originally posted by IceFire
A minor victory when all the cards were essentially in Germanys favor.

Dunkirk was a victory? I thought it was a rout.

Originally posted by ngtm1r
The Germans could never have actually defeated the Red Army, but they could have inflicted casualities even Stalin would have balked at. To do so, however, they needed all their troops. That was the plan for the Ardennes offensive. It was Hitler's only hope; he might be able to defeat the western Allies, then make peace with the Russians.

I dont think Hitler was under any illusions as to the effect the Bulge battle would have had on the outcome of the war, he knew he was ****ed and wanted to go down fighting. The Ardennes was the only place he could realisticly do so.

Originally posted by ngtm1r
Ultimately, while the Wehrmacht bled on the Russian steppes, it died in the Ardennes and the Rhine River valley. That was where its best units and best equipment went, and that was where those units and equipment were destroyed.

The wermacht died long before this, what happened here was the last of its reserves were used up. losses here were 100,000 compared to an overall of millions. Some would say the killing blow was stalingrad, everything after that was just prolonging it.

Originally posted by ngtm1r
Eisenhower refused to race the Russians to Berlin. Montgomery wanted to go. Patton wanted to go. They could have made it, too. Eisenhower asked Bradley what he thought it would cost in terms of casualities. Bradley said probably about a hundred thousand, which was an awful lot for a prestige objective that would have to be turned over to the Russians anyways, because of the decisions made at the Yalta conference. So Eisenhower said no, they weren't going to Berlin. And considering the experience of the Red Army in Berlin, Eisenhower surely made the right choice.

Actually operation Market Garden blew the allied chances of getting to Berlin before the Russians.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Gank
Please dont put our flag in along with the rest of the UK, we fought long and hard to get out of it, the least you could do is respect that.

He didn't, though; he put it there making explicitly clear it wasn't part of the uk (but it is still part of the British isles).

[Clave]

Oh, did I mention how crazy the Irish were?

[IceFire]

Originally posted by Clave
Oh, did I mention how crazy the Irish were?

Thats the other part of my heritage.  I'm a crazy Polish/Irish/English mix.  Probably means I can drink and eat perogies like there is no tommorow.  Oh and I get sunburn in September and October


I call Dunkirk a minor victory because otherwise the BEF would have been totally lost.  Its a small miracle they were able to evacuate what they could at the time and under the conditions.  It wasn't a victory in terms of equipment or holding territory...maybe I should call it a military miracle?  Its certainly up there for most impressive thing organized in such a short period of time under such conditions and pressure from the enemy.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Gank
Please dont put our flag in along with the rest of the UK, we fought long and hard to get out of it, the least you could do is respect that.

[color=66ff00]I often think that saying that kind of thing is a bit of a slap in the face for those that did actually put their lives on the line to liberate the island.

I know for a fact that I've taken up no arms to fight and would not wish to downplay their efforts by claiming that I put in as much work as they did.
[/color]

[Clave]

Edited........................................

[Gank]

No offence meant Clave,  I know you put in a disclaimer, just that you wouldnt believe the amount of people who do actually think its part of the UK.

Maeg, seeing how the war of independance ended over 80 years ago I dont think anybody would actually take it that I was impling I fought in it. As for you, iirc you're british, no?

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Gank
No offence meant Clave,  I know you put in a disclaimer, just that you wouldnt believe the amount of people who do actually think its part of the UK.

Maeg, seeing how the war of independance ended over 80 years ago I dont think anybody would actually take it that I was impling I fought in it. As for you, iirc you're british, no?

[color=66ff00]Nope, Irish, Armagh.
[/color]