»
Discussion
»
Philosophy 101
»
The Bug
| Philosophy 101 |
|
The Bug |
|
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan 
|
How was it that France, which had a larger and better equipped army on the field, failed to defend itself so as to be totally defeated by Hitler in six weeks in 1940? How was it that it was almost a year and a half after before the first German soldier was killed by any resistance movement? |
||
| © Copyright 2006 John Pawlik - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Bad French tactics Good German tactics France expected a campaign similar to WW1, the Maginot line was designed and built as a fixed and immovable barrier to act as a defensive line in a ‘trench warfare’ scenario. Germany outflanked the defences of the Maginot line and split the BEF from the main French battalions by a concentrated Panzer attack through the Ardennes using the newly developed tactic of Blitzkrieg. quote: Good Free French Tactics The French surrendered on 25th June after which Vichy France was not at war with Germany, having seemingly no support (the British sank the French fleet which didn’t help allied relations) the Free French opposed to the Vichy government laid low and set to work planning and building a viable network of resistance. This resistance movement grew as animosity replaced apathy towards the occupying forces until resistance became not only possible but also sustainable. Also by this point the Allies had re-forged links with the resistance movement which gave them access to weapons and supplies. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Yes, but France was attacked in May of 1940 where as the war began in September of the previous year and during that interval much of Hitler's might in the form of armor, guns, and planes had been in the East and then had to be brought back to the West. There's the why's of the "Phony War" to be considered. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
The phoney war came about because the French were reluctant to rush headlong into another re-run of WW1’s trench warfare instead it had built a complex, and frontally impenetrable, defence - the Maginot Line, to advance and abandon those defences would have been seen as stupid in light of such a belief. Their whole strategy was based around defence not attack so they decided to sit in their concrete bunker system and wait for the Germans to attack them – this turned out to be a bad move but at the time it would have made perfect sense. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
From the "World at War" to Occupation by Ian Ousay which I'm reading now and which brought my question there is an element spoken of which seems to have been critical and that is a failure of will, a loss of nerve on the part of the French as a whole which significantly contributed to their lack of response and their defeat. I found interesting the attitude on the part of an influential number of French that they had been dragged into the war by the English. That Hitler invading Poland, (my parents' country), was not reason enough for them to go to war. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
A loss of nerve is a little too strong, it seems to fall just this side of branding them cowards. Of course there was a reluctance to engage in another re-run of WWI but that didn’t just affect the French, I’m sure that the memory of WWI was fresh in the minds of everyone involved, some nations even avoided confronting Germany in 1939 based, in part, on such a reluctance. You could even argue that Germany used that reluctance, in fact relied upon it, when annexing land before the outbreak of war, Poland was just one annex too many. Almost 200,000 Allied lives were lost defending France, that has to be evidence for at least some will and a little nerve. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
"Almost 200,000 Allied lives were lost defending France" A little high but you may be including civilians along with soldiers killed in the retreat, ( retreats are often more expensive). The Germans captured two million French soldiers. All accounts indicate morale broke very quickly. [This message has been edited by Huan Yi (03-06-2006 12:02 AM).] |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
The figures are hard to establish precisely, the number I used was an approximation from several sources of total combatants killed, one of which quotes the following statistics: France - 90,000 killed Britain - 68,111 Belgium - 23,350 The Netherlands - 9,779 Poland - 6,092 From "Battle of France" Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_France |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
In the first year after its defeat France was occupied and administered by thirty thousand Germans. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
It wouldn’t have made a difference if there were only thirty. If five heavily armed men turned up at your house and put a feather on your lawn and told you there’d be serious consequences if you moved it, would you pick the feather up and throw it in the trash as soon as they left? It wouldn’t be hard; after all a feather’s not heavy, throwing it in the trash would be easy, wouldn’t it? |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
It does matter if first two million heavily armed men supposedly armed to protect you gave up their weapons. There was a critical failure of will, spirit; it was not cowardice but a lack of urge to be brave. Why is the question. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
