History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedTheBattle of France, 1940 - Easy Victory?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
ChickenShoes View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Apr-2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 152
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ChickenShoes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2007 at 16:18
Originally posted by Majkes Majkes wrote:

Originally posted by ChickenShoes ChickenShoes wrote:

 Do You want to say they had big losses conquering Austria without a shot?Confused They were stronger in 1940 than in 1939 but not much. It is one year and they had serious losses in Poland. It doesn't make sense what You say.
 
I really can't understand what you're asking, so I'll try my best. Hitler was making moves before he really had the muscle to back them. A professor once told me it was like " he was in an interrogation room, tied up, with a gun to his head. Hitler then got rid of the rope, got the gun away, and fired it at his interrogater before the interrogater could do the simple task of pulling the trigger". Hitler bluffed Anchluss playing upon the Allies ' intense disdain for another war. His command was still in its amateur phases in 1938 as it didn't have much applicability yet. I assume the same goes for 1939, but Poland was perhaps better psychologically equipped than France anyway; they just got their independence again and really resisted occupation. Planning for France was also much more thorough, beginning with Fall Rot in 1935 and the invasion of Poland wasn't discussed until Case White in 1939, the year of invasion. Therefore the Polish invasion was a much hastier operation.
 
Ok, I think I missunderstood You, sorry.
[/QUOTE]
 
 
quite alright!
It is not enough that I succeed - everyone else must fail
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 1106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2007 at 23:03
Originally posted by Majkes Majkes wrote:

 
There wasn't almost any obstacles on border between Poland and Geramy but if You count small rivers, forests and etc. than You are right but it wasn't significant for the war.
 
Sometimes even these small rivers, bogs etc. could help. In the battle of Wizna, 720 Polish soldiers were able to stop Guderian Corps (about 42.000 soldiers + 350 tanks) for a couple of days.
This battle also shows what could happen in Eastern Poland, which had a territory similar to neighbourhood of Wizna.
 
Back to Top
Majkes View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Imperial Ambassador

Joined: 06-May-2006
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 1143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Majkes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Apr-2007 at 01:08
Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

Originally posted by Majkes Majkes wrote:

 
There wasn't almost any obstacles on border between Poland and Geramy but if You count small rivers, forests and etc. than You are right but it wasn't significant for the war.
 
Sometimes even these small rivers, bogs etc. could help. In the battle of Wizna, 720 Polish soldiers were able to stop Guderian Corps (about 42.000 soldiers + 350 tanks) for a couple of days.
This battle also shows what could happen in Eastern Poland, which had a territory similar to neighbourhood of Wizna.
 
 
This Battle is known as Polish Thermopyle.
Back to Top
rommel View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 07-Jun-2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rommel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jun-2007 at 13:07
it was an easy victory in the sense that hitlers gamble paid off by  choosing to take his main panzer invasion force through the ardenne route to invade france. Because the hilly and wooded terrain was thought unsuitable terrain for panzers. Frances main bulk of their force would drive to Belgium to meet with the Germans who would have been diverted by the maginot line which stopped at the belgium frontier. French troops got trapped in belgium and without any fresh reserves the main panzer force crushed the French and moral which they never recovered.
d murray
Back to Top
Kamikaze 738 View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 26-Mar-2007
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Points: 463
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kamikaze 738 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2007 at 10:41
Meh, the Battle of France has to be one of the worst defeats in the history of the country. A few years eariler in East Asia, even China put up a better fight against the Japanese at Shanghai, holding out for around 3 months while the French cant even hold its own country for 2 months. And China is was particularly weak at the time. So yes, the Battle of France was an easy victory for the Germans and a crushing defeat for the French.
Back to Top
lollercoaster View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 10-Apr-2007
Location: Neutral Zone
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lollercoaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jun-2007 at 14:37
Originally posted by Kamikaze 738 Kamikaze 738 wrote:

Meh, the Battle of France has to be one of the worst defeats in the history of the country. A few years eariler in East Asia, even China put up a better†fight against the Japanese at Shanghai, holding out for around 3 months while the French cant even hold its own country for 2 months. And China is was particularly weak at the time. So yes, the Battle of France was an easy victory for the Germans and a crushing defeat for the French.


LOL Are you seriously comparing the japaneese army to the german military might?

Edited by lollercoaster - 12-Jun-2007 at 14:38
Back to Top
Kamikaze 738 View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 26-Mar-2007
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Points: 463
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kamikaze 738 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Jun-2007 at 00:27
Originally posted by lollercoaster lollercoaster wrote:

Originally posted by Kamikaze 738 Kamikaze 738 wrote:

Meh, the Battle of France has to be one of the worst defeats in the history of the country. A few years eariler in East Asia, even China put up a better fight against the Japanese at Shanghai, holding out for around 3 months while the French cant even hold its own country for 2 months. And China is was particularly weak at the time. So yes, the Battle of France was an easy victory for the Germans and a crushing defeat for the French.


LOL Are you seriously comparing the japaneese army to the german military might?

Yes and I am seriously comparing the Chinese army to the French military might Ermm
Back to Top
Joinville View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 353
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joinville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Jun-2007 at 06:21
Originally posted by Kamikaze 738 Kamikaze 738 wrote:

Meh, the Battle of France has to be one of the worst defeats in the history of the country. A few years eariler in East Asia, even China put up a better†fight against the Japanese at Shanghai, holding out for around 3 months while the French cant even hold its own country for 2 months. And China is was particularly weak at the time. So yes, the Battle of France was an easy victory for the Germans and a crushing defeat for the French.

Well, the Chinese army holding out for three months was the western trained best troops of Chiang Kai-shek. (German trained iirc.) And they were pretty much destroyed in the fighting, serioulsy hampering the Guomindang's later war effort. China never had access to that quality of troops again in WWII.

And of course we can compare the best troops China could field to second rate French middle-age conscript troops running like chickens from the German Panzers and Stukas.
Just remind me again why it's a more relevant comparison that say with crack French formations like the Lťgion or the Chasseuers alpins?
One must not insult the future.
Back to Top
deadkenny View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 21-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 994
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote deadkenny Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Sep-2007 at 08:26
Originally posted by Kapikulu Kapikulu wrote:

...Still, we have the Dunkirk myth out there..


Dunkirk 'myth'?  What might that be?
Back to Top
Dekameron View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 02-Jan-2008
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dekameron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jan-2008 at 05:36
Originally posted by lollercoaster lollercoaster wrote:

Originally posted by Kamikaze 738 Kamikaze 738 wrote:

Meh, the Battle of France has to be one of the worst defeats in the history of the country. A few years eariler in East Asia, even China put up a better fight against the Japanese at Shanghai, holding out for around 3 months while the French cant even hold its own country for 2 months. And China is was particularly weak at the time. So yes, the Battle of France was an easy victory for the Germans and a crushing defeat for the French.


LOL Are you seriously comparing the japaneese army to the german military might?
 
My good sir, the german military might during 1940 was a myth, at that time large quantities of german armour were still czech tanks, panzer Is and IIs, significant amount of motorized infantry was actually mounted on horseback and at least a third of artillery was also towed via horses.
 
Germany was still seriously lacking in MGs HMGs and MPs.
 
The german tactic while daring would not work if the french had to put it bluntly balls to fight.
 
In Poland it was proven that blitz tactics with tanks while effective can and will be stopped by a stubborn enemy causing massive loss to own armour, the reason why poles could not hold up for long was because of their own inadequate AT and AA countermeasures and the fact that they got butt f*cked by over half a milion russian troops.

The french army was large, well equipped, its armoured forces equipped with significantly better tanks at the time, besides Maginot line french had fortified regions practically everywhere, vast numbers of artillery both mobile and stationary and help of a powerfull british expeditionary unit to boot.
 
IF the french showed will to fight they had a good chance of winning, what we have witnessed in France was massive incompetence coupled with cowardice by the officers, general staff and the common soldier.
 
 
Back to Top
Jonathan4290 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Mar-2008
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jonathan4290 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Mar-2008 at 00:47
Maybe I just like being the opposing view but I'll try anyways: the German victory over France may not have been as easy as we think. I said AS EASY! I recently read an essay in No End Save Victory (a compilation of WWII essays) which described the Battle of Sedan. The essay describes Sedan, the decisive engagment of the campaign, as one of many difficulties; Guderian struggled to establish bridgeheads and if the French had concentrated local firepower it's possible Guderian could've been delayed long enough to change the campaign.
 
On a sidenote: I find the last two hundred years of French military history horribly ironic. After finally losing the Napoleonic Wars, they decide defense is the way to go. Then after they overuse their doctrine and lose the Franco-Prussian War, they decide offense is the way to go. Then after they bleed their army white with this doctrine in World War I, they decide defence is the way to go and build the Maginot Line and to not attack Germany when all their strength was in Poland. The end result is well discussed in this thread.
Like great battles? How about when they're animated for easy viewing?
Visit my site, The Art of Battle: Animated Battle Maps at www.theartofbattle.com.
Back to Top
Joinville View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 353
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joinville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2008 at 19:24
Originally posted by Dekameron Dekameron wrote:

Originally posted by lollercoaster lollercoaster wrote:

Originally posted by Kamikaze 738 Kamikaze 738 wrote:

Meh, the Battle of France has to be one of the worst defeats in the history of the country. A few years eariler in East Asia, even China put up a better fight against the Japanese at Shanghai, holding out for around 3 months while the French cant even hold its own country for 2 months. And China is was particularly weak at the time. So yes, the Battle of France was an easy victory for the Germans and a crushing defeat for the French.
LOL Are you seriously comparing the japaneese army to the german military might?

 

My good sir, the german military might during 1940 was a myth, at that time large quantities of german armour were still czech tanks, panzer Is and IIs, significant amount of motorized infantry was actually mounted on horseback and at least a third of artillery was also towed via horses.

 

Germany was still seriously lacking in MGs HMGs and MPs.

 

The german tactic while daring would not work if the french had to put it bluntly balls to fight.

 

In Poland it was proven that blitz tactics with tanks while effective can and will be stopped by a stubborn enemy causing massive loss to own armour, the reason why poles could not hold up for long was because of their own inadequate AT and AA countermeasures and the fact that they got butt f*cked by over half a milion russian troops.

The french army was large, well equipped, its armoured forces equipped with significantly better tanks at the time, besides Maginot line french had fortified regions practically everywhere, vast numbers of artillery both mobile and stationary and help of a powerfull british expeditionary unit to boot.

 

IF the french showed will to fight they had a good chance of winning, what we have witnessed in France was massive incompetence coupled with cowardice by the officers, general staff and the common soldier.

 

 

The major French problem was not unwillingness to fight.

Initially it was sub-par intelligence and a command and control system so sluggish they put French commanders light-years behind the curve of events.

The French inability to put up an effective fight was not due to lack of moral, or "balls", but lack of coordination in the face of the German offensive.

That AND the fact that the two best French field armies found themselves up by the Belgian border when the real fighting had to be done by second rate over-aged conscript units in the South. That was how good the German plan of attacked worked out for them. Which incidentally has nothing to do with "balls".

Try stopping the German army of 1940 of 104 divisions hurtlig through northern France, regardless if it's reality can't live up to its mythology, with 11 French divisions, no matter their quality, as was the historical reality when Gamélin stepped down as CiC and Weygand got the job.

It can't be done. It's nothing to do with "balls", and no end of "balls" would make a lick of difference under the circumstances.

It's probably more amazing that the French army under the circumstances did as much damage to the Germans as they did.
One must not insult the future.
Back to Top
Red4tribe View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jun-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 171
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Red4tribe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 21:06
Lets not forget that the Belgians, British and the Dutch were all assisting France. The Dutch even took out over 50% of the Lufftwaffe's transport force with their disastorous landings at the Hague on May 10.
Had this day been wanting, the world had never seen the last stage of perfection to which human nature is capable of attaining.

George Washington - March 15, 1783

Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2008 at 18:45
Hello to you  all
 
I think that the battle of France was pretty much an easy victory. The Franco-British army was exceeded the Germans in everything except the number of planes. I disgree with the opinion that Franco-British intelligence was flawed, it was perfect and they knew everything about the enemy and his plans well in advance (the affaire in which a german plane containing the plans crashed in Jan 41). The allies knew the date of the attack but did nothing, as one historian said they fought a 1941 war with 1914 mentality. For three days the German columns lay exposed for any allied plane but the allied used nothing of their aviation resources, not even to do a proper survaillence flight.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Red4tribe View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jun-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 171
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Red4tribe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2008 at 20:03
Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

Hello to you  all
 
I think that the battle of France was pretty much an easy victory. The Franco-British army was exceeded the Germans in everything except the number of planes. I disgree with the opinion that Franco-British intelligence was flawed, it was perfect and they knew everything about the enemy and his plans well in advance (the affaire in which a german plane containing the plans crashed in Jan 41). The allies knew the date of the attack but did nothing, as one historian said they fought a 1941 war with 1914 mentality. For three days the German columns lay exposed for any allied plane but the allied used nothing of their aviation resources, not even to do a proper survaillence flight.
 
Al-Jassas
 
Do you mean 1940?
Had this day been wanting, the world had never seen the last stage of perfection to which human nature is capable of attaining.

George Washington - March 15, 1783

Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2008 at 20:37
Well the exchange from 41 to 14 was better Embarrassed.
 
AL-jassas
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.062 seconds.