Syawla
20-06-2005, 19:39
OK the other guy kind of screwed up his post in defence of France in 1940 and so as a history graduate, I will try and do a better job by answering one or two points made by others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenshrike
Um, given that the Germans had attacked Belgium in the first WW and then attacked France, why exactly didn't the French fortify that border?
France did consider building equivalent fortresses across the Belgian frontier but, until 1936, Belgium was an ally of France's and France felt it would send a bad message to their allies, to be seen to be abandoning them witha wall of forts. In 1936 however, the Belgan government declared itself a neutral power and stated that it didn't want any war between France and Germany fought on its soil. At this point, French resources were poured into building a fortress across Belgium but, with many in the French government maintaining links in Belgium and the Belgians themselves not ruling out the prospect of re-aligning itself with the Allies (as it did when it was invaded), the French could not build a line across the Belgian frontier to protect itself at the prospect of the highly trained and motivated Belgians, with perhaps some Dutch, being miffed. Alongside this was the fact that the Maginot line took some 10 years to complete. In 1936, when Belgium declared itself neutral, there was never any hope of succesfully putting fortresses into the area and having it done by 1940, had they know that was when they would be needed. French military resources were, and I would say wisely, concentrated on tank building and on increasing the size of the Air Force, more important in the long run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenshrike
I mean, Hitler obviously knew of the existence of the Maginot line, given that it would be a bit hard to conceal. He also probably knew how far it extended. Combined with the fact that the Belgians had too small of a population to defend their country it seems quite obvious how any semi-intelligent commander would attack France. Apparently the French high command didn't think this one through.
True, which is why the British and French troops were concentrated in the Flanders area, with the plan being that in the event of a German invasion of Belgium, their troops would race to the river Meuse in Belgium, link up with any Dutch and Belgian troops and fight the Germans there while reserves were called up. And this happened. What the French did not forsee was a simultaneous assault through the Ardennes upon Sedan which Petain described as "Impenetrable". This assault meant that the Germans could outflank and cut off the allies in Belgium. Petain cannot be blamed fully for this error, as Hitler and even the German commander who thought of the idea of going through the Ardennes, had doubts as to whether it could be done. But it was. And so the French and British realised, too late, that they were being outflanked and fled, from positions in Belgium which they could and had defended relatively well, back into France to avoid encirclement. At this stage, French morale was at its lowest while the British lost faith in the French army's ability to defend France and thus the Germans were able to shrink the size of the pocket that lay in northern France which contained the British Expeditionary Force and the best of the French Army, leading to Dunkirk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenshrike
Also, since the French and British were essentially the direct cause for the econoimc situation that allowed Hitler to rise to power as easily as he did, I have little sympathy for them.
This quote has a lot of things wrong with it, besides being incorrect so I shall not respond to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonstein
In 1939, France's army was one of the most powerful armies in the world. After WW1 however, they built a huge fortification system called the "Maginot Line"...
Then Germany attacked Poland, Britain and France declared war on them, and the war began. In Winter 1939-40 there was nothing going on along the border, other than a small French offensive that was stopped because the French strategy focussed on defence and the Maginot line...
That plan included an attack through Holland and Belgium, so the Maginot Line...
Generally, allied command still assumed though that the main German offensive went against the Maginot Line, and so much of the French army was left there...
During all this time however, many troops were still along the Maginot Line...
The Maginot Line is one of the biggest inanimate scapegoats in history. The French did not think that the Maginot Line was all that was needed. As I have stated, the French expected an assault through Belgium and so most of their best troops were placed there. The main mistake in troop placing was not that they were placed too far to the South in the Maginot line, rather that they were placed too far to the North in Belgium, leaving weaker units to defend the areas around Sedan and the Ardennes while the main units ran forward to secure positions inside Belgium
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonstein
In short, Paris was taken as the French troops didn’t want to see the city destroyed by war, the French government retreated to the South, and the war was essentially lost.
I am sorry but that is not true. Paris was lost, because the vast majority of French troops were either stuck in a pocket at the Channel, or were being kept from retreating by German attacks into the Maginot Line, designed for the very purpose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonstein
All in all, France did well. The circumstances were bad, their Generals were usually far removed from the fighting and their communication equipment was inadequate.
French equipment was as good as the Germans in many respects, and in fact much of the French equipment was superior, including tanks (French BIs were used in the Soviet campaign for example) but the Germans used the equipment much better than the French.
The French command structure was far removed but no more than Germany's in that Hitler was in Berlin with the majority of his senior staff at the time of the invasion. The difference was that German generals were greater empowered to use their own initiative than the French. It was a lesson the Germans were to forget come Stalingrad and one that Stalin would learn.
The circumstances were the circumstances. Can't complain about that, but yes on the whole the French nation did not do a lot that was inexplicable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenshrike
Um, given that the Germans had attacked Belgium in the first WW and then attacked France, why exactly didn't the French fortify that border?
France did consider building equivalent fortresses across the Belgian frontier but, until 1936, Belgium was an ally of France's and France felt it would send a bad message to their allies, to be seen to be abandoning them witha wall of forts. In 1936 however, the Belgan government declared itself a neutral power and stated that it didn't want any war between France and Germany fought on its soil. At this point, French resources were poured into building a fortress across Belgium but, with many in the French government maintaining links in Belgium and the Belgians themselves not ruling out the prospect of re-aligning itself with the Allies (as it did when it was invaded), the French could not build a line across the Belgian frontier to protect itself at the prospect of the highly trained and motivated Belgians, with perhaps some Dutch, being miffed. Alongside this was the fact that the Maginot line took some 10 years to complete. In 1936, when Belgium declared itself neutral, there was never any hope of succesfully putting fortresses into the area and having it done by 1940, had they know that was when they would be needed. French military resources were, and I would say wisely, concentrated on tank building and on increasing the size of the Air Force, more important in the long run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenshrike
I mean, Hitler obviously knew of the existence of the Maginot line, given that it would be a bit hard to conceal. He also probably knew how far it extended. Combined with the fact that the Belgians had too small of a population to defend their country it seems quite obvious how any semi-intelligent commander would attack France. Apparently the French high command didn't think this one through.
True, which is why the British and French troops were concentrated in the Flanders area, with the plan being that in the event of a German invasion of Belgium, their troops would race to the river Meuse in Belgium, link up with any Dutch and Belgian troops and fight the Germans there while reserves were called up. And this happened. What the French did not forsee was a simultaneous assault through the Ardennes upon Sedan which Petain described as "Impenetrable". This assault meant that the Germans could outflank and cut off the allies in Belgium. Petain cannot be blamed fully for this error, as Hitler and even the German commander who thought of the idea of going through the Ardennes, had doubts as to whether it could be done. But it was. And so the French and British realised, too late, that they were being outflanked and fled, from positions in Belgium which they could and had defended relatively well, back into France to avoid encirclement. At this stage, French morale was at its lowest while the British lost faith in the French army's ability to defend France and thus the Germans were able to shrink the size of the pocket that lay in northern France which contained the British Expeditionary Force and the best of the French Army, leading to Dunkirk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenshrike
Also, since the French and British were essentially the direct cause for the econoimc situation that allowed Hitler to rise to power as easily as he did, I have little sympathy for them.
This quote has a lot of things wrong with it, besides being incorrect so I shall not respond to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonstein
In 1939, France's army was one of the most powerful armies in the world. After WW1 however, they built a huge fortification system called the "Maginot Line"...
Then Germany attacked Poland, Britain and France declared war on them, and the war began. In Winter 1939-40 there was nothing going on along the border, other than a small French offensive that was stopped because the French strategy focussed on defence and the Maginot line...
That plan included an attack through Holland and Belgium, so the Maginot Line...
Generally, allied command still assumed though that the main German offensive went against the Maginot Line, and so much of the French army was left there...
During all this time however, many troops were still along the Maginot Line...
The Maginot Line is one of the biggest inanimate scapegoats in history. The French did not think that the Maginot Line was all that was needed. As I have stated, the French expected an assault through Belgium and so most of their best troops were placed there. The main mistake in troop placing was not that they were placed too far to the South in the Maginot line, rather that they were placed too far to the North in Belgium, leaving weaker units to defend the areas around Sedan and the Ardennes while the main units ran forward to secure positions inside Belgium
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonstein
In short, Paris was taken as the French troops didn’t want to see the city destroyed by war, the French government retreated to the South, and the war was essentially lost.
I am sorry but that is not true. Paris was lost, because the vast majority of French troops were either stuck in a pocket at the Channel, or were being kept from retreating by German attacks into the Maginot Line, designed for the very purpose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonstein
All in all, France did well. The circumstances were bad, their Generals were usually far removed from the fighting and their communication equipment was inadequate.
French equipment was as good as the Germans in many respects, and in fact much of the French equipment was superior, including tanks (French BIs were used in the Soviet campaign for example) but the Germans used the equipment much better than the French.
The French command structure was far removed but no more than Germany's in that Hitler was in Berlin with the majority of his senior staff at the time of the invasion. The difference was that German generals were greater empowered to use their own initiative than the French. It was a lesson the Germans were to forget come Stalingrad and one that Stalin would learn.
The circumstances were the circumstances. Can't complain about that, but yes on the whole the French nation did not do a lot that was inexplicable.