What would have happened if France had held the Meuse in 1940?

[r16]

Spoiler:

let me have a comparative analysis here . When the Ottoman Empire was obviously defeated in the Great War , Mustafa Kemal was not in rest , he worked hard to do something , maybe he was part of the Ittihadists that ruined the country and he wanted to save himself by staying on top , maybe he was as patriotic as Turkish history teaching has him . He asked to become the War Minister , was refused . Then the Allies needed somebody to disarm the Turkish armies in the East , so that Armenians could win enough territory to be worthy of protection by the Allies . The world was just out of a maelstorm , colonial escapades on their own was not well accepted .And the guy to disarm the lot had to be someone with gravity , reputation and a cool head . So that the Pontic Greeks could rise up and make their own state as well .

when ı was just out of teenage years and into full suspicion of the world around me , ı was directed to a couple of books where ı learned Kemal talked with a high ranking Italian diplomat , maybe named Count Sforza , right before he left for Samsun and it caused further wounds to the history teaching ı had in school . You know there are times you must demolish a thing to build it again .

so what's the deal ? Instead of being the lonely hero who inspired people to fight the invaders after a decade of unbroken misery and defeat , where he was the only beacon of light in the doom and gloom of a dying once glorious empire , Mustafa Kemal was a guy who outran his remit . The Allies ( the French and the British ) were mistaken to think that he was a danger if left in Istanbul , where he could organise an Ittihadist resistance of sorts . Even more mistaken in assuming he was a regular Ittihadist , ready to bark and bite and wave the waggy tail as and when commanded by foreign masters . He was once the aide of Vahdettin , the padishah who ordered him to organise some capability of resistance , without causing too much trouble , so that the Allies could be brought to the table to actually make a deal with the Throne ; an American Mandate was seen as the best option . A Greek invasion did not enter to it as they had a substantial population in the remaining Ottoman lands , if they broke away the rump would have been only busy starving . The mission of Mustafa Kemal died the day before he was set to sail . When the Greek Army landed in Izmir on the 15th of May , 1919 .

would he follow the orders from abroad , or strategy from the Throne , if there had been no Greek invasion ? Of course not , but that is not exactly the point .

history depends so much on when it is written . When the revolutionary history was cast into concrete by the Nutuk of 1928 , a long speech Kemal had at the party congress , even the deals of 1923 were in disarray . There were many in the country who didn't oppose a single strongman , a dictatorship . If they themselves were this strongman , the dictator . Ittihad had come back in good order and there are serious limits to how dictating a dictator can be . Kemal was already a prisoner of the system he had created .

that system was of course always opposed . At the times of my teenage years as mentioned above , there was this liberal goverment at the helm that had the mission of "globalising" this country and a certain Islamist , still famous in 2012 , came up with things unheard before . For example , the revolutionary myth makes much of the ship that took Kemal's group to Samsun , it is reported to be old , small and totally uncapable of doing the trip , it didn't even have a compass .Hence the trip in itself was an odyssey of heroism and Turkish patriotism ... In primary school , when ı was growing this affinity for military things and checked what little amount of references were around , ı would look at the ship's only drawing and wonder what its tonnage or dimensions were . Probably because it wouldn't make much impression on the fishermen who sailed in rickety boats , the history books would never have the numbers . Well this Islamist had made the effort and found them from British register . Omitting to convert them though . So Bandırma became a transatlantic with a height of 70 meters . 70 feet from the keel to the top of the masts would have been quite allright . Yes , you still will not find the true numbers about Bandırma ...

so what happened ? Throne's desire to have a core of military power to have a bargaining chip at the diplomatic table was realised . Though the Allies had no desire to talk . French aspersions were sort of easily defeated , as they already had huge problems in Syria . The British had no means to impose their will and it took some time to build an actual army , instead of a talking point . Which went onto defeat the Greeks . Our Eastern borders were meanwhile "secured" by the Reds who needed a buffer against the West they were not ready to face . While all these were happening Istanbul did manage to shoot itself in the food . Damat Ferit , married to a daughter of a Padishah , was governing at the time and he was a proper toady of the British . Had the roles been reversed and his opponent had actually married likewise to become Damat Mustafa Kemal Pasha , Ferit would have been shot to be replaced by a capable person , a liberation army would have been raised to kick the hell out of the invading Greeks (*) and Kemal Pasha would have managed to keep the throne afloat . By possibly commanding that liberation army when the time came . Because you know there were a lot of talking to have some "Crown Prince" in Ankara .

thinking that the British were invincible in this new world where there were nobody left to oppose them is what doomed the Ottomans . Yes there were a lot of people who wanted them in place , so that the authority of the Throne could be used as " the kingmaker " , there were tons of wannabe dictators . Kemal was actually capable on his own ... You still can not make the Ottoman family openly talk against Atatürk , though his "people" are easy ... Even in this new Turkey , where mentioning Nutuk in any capacity can become the first step in your incarceration as a coup-plotter .

it is so fashionable to berate the old , the leaders of the 1980 coup are soon to be in court . The event is hailed something great by the commentators , who accuse the two survivors as bloody murderers who watched while the country burned , waiting for the situation could mature so that the country would accept a military intervention . And the commentators include the whole spectrum of colours and views . One particular guy excluded . In my teens ı had seen this thin storybook where a distant nameless country had suffered a godless dictator who had oppressed religion and honest people who believed in God , naturally there weren't any honest people who didn't believe in God . The dictator was also a pedophile . The guy whom ı always believed to be the author of the book , was in trouble for molestation of a minor and the PR for his release include him arriving in court with his belt hanging from the sides , bog standart senility aspect . A "sad" decline for the guy who always bragged to be first person who murdered for Islam in Turkey .

leaves a healthy bunch of people in abundant numbers , and influence . With one particular guy who is such a democrat that it escapes attention that he was among the people who burned the country for coup to happen , ı hear he was number two to the "fascist" who ran Istanbul . This "fascist" dude will probably be more familiar to Western intelligences as the guy who organized the assasination attempt on the Pope in 1981 . Yeah , no need for them in Turkey . Meanwhile the presence of the said democrat in a history society founded by Kemal was so unbearable that he had to resign ...

even people who oppose the new Turkey are for it in a way . This obviously leftist guy who made a movie/documentary on Kemal could not bring himself to declare the Ittihadists had "jailed" him in former Ottoman palaces , between womanising and the bottle , using his good intentions to reform the country in the exact same way Moscow was creating the "Soviet man" and his reputation was the one shield against the counter-revolution ... Instead his late-night drinking bouts were explained by the "humane" explanation he was afraid of the dark and didn't want to remain alone . ı have seen perfectly reasonable people declaring that movie maker was in the pay of foreign countries to dishonour Kemal , by his heavy drinking , smoking as noticed by 10 year old movie goers "interviewed" on TV , womanizing and fear of the dark , so that the new Turkey could go forward .

mustafa Kemal has been dead since 1938 . And the newly elites have obviously failed to ask the Ottoman family why they never took part in rebellions against the Kemalist state .

the reason for all the rambling ? Winning the deal gives you the right to write the history and omit the unsavory . Now that ı won't be offering any evidence on whether Petain sent de Gaulle to England to fight in his name without disclosing it , some entrance of this kind is necessary . Yeah , the unspoilered part will be thankfully much shorter...





(*) ai , martian tripods galore , a joke that makes sense if only the reader is familiar with my sorry existence .

maybe ı should also have part of my entry in post #40 of this thread which relevantly says

... As usual many of my views are not shared by regular history and ı don't claim to know better . Nor ı intend to "dis" people who have dedicated themselves to the study of history in a professional or amateur capacity.

so , we would somehow have a major anomaly where German forces were more successful than they had any right to be , the Allies were hugely demoralized and beginning to fall apart , as an alliance . The Wikipedia article , which seems to be quite in favour of Petain , tells on May 24th , the French PM Reynaud told the Marshall that an armistice was necessary . The Brits were moving out instead of attacking South , to cut off the Germans and no British fighters were around , apart from the topping of RAF already in France .

having some kind of writer's block right now , let's say by June 1st there was an absolute feeling of necessity for the French goverment of the day to bring Petain back into the game . This is some backroom stuff that has no relevancy in the eyes of any student of history , it just happens . Simply people know people and the rapport or at least familiarity of the old days provide a basis of understanding , somewhere to start talking . That would be exactly why the British represantative to France , Mr. Spears , would threaten Petain with blockade and naval bombardment if a ceasefire with Germany took place on May 31th , as reported by Wikipedia , something ı am newly aware .

we have already seen the break between de Gaulle and Petain in this thread and ı won't doubt the "antagonism" . Though this unmentionable back room thing presumes an unbreakable bond among the party that can be identified , the French are to be a solid block . De Gaulle takes his orders from Petain , for the duration . There is a war going on , the unavailable Spitfires has cut a bloody swathe in the ranks of the Luftwaffe and Germans are relieved the thorn of Dunkerque has been removed without too much fuss . Which seems bloody betrayal to the French , to those who remember how perfidious Albion could be in the days before Entente Cordiale . Mind you , the French are actively joining London in name-calling the Belgians for chickening out of the war , treason is in the air .

which is reinforced by the improvised German attack that immediately follow the evacuation . It is one of the more obscure parts of the WW2 , only because the initial French resistance was so hard that it doesn't make sense in the established narrative of the Second World War . Anyhow , no doubt influenced greatly by the fact that France had lost nearly half of its army in May, it came to an end .

as said blocked for the duration . Besides the Turkish language forum where ı asked for anectodal reinforcement convinced me that my planned piece would be too against de Gaulle and too for Petain . Considering his flag and the idea that the term fascist is supposed to be derived from some sort of ax , the result might not be exactly good for me . Maybe ı can get enough spirit in the weekend to make another r16 thing .

so apart from the notion that Vahdettin sent Kemal to the East , and courts charged treason and Kemal had military support from the Russians ... Sounds familiar ? Not that ı would be convincing without the blockage .

[Verbose]

Originally Posted by r16

having some kind of writer's block right now , let's say by June 1st there was an absolute feeling of necessity for the French goverment of the day to bring Petain back into the game . This is some backroom stuff that has no relevancy in the eyes of any student of history , it just happens . Simply people know people and the rapport or at least familiarity of the old days provide a basis of understanding , somewhere to start talking . That would be exactly why the British represantative to France , Mr. Spears , would threaten Petain with blockade and naval bombardment if a ceasefire with Germany took place on May 31th , as reported by Wikipedia , something ı am newly aware .

we have already seen the break between de Gaulle and Petain in this thread and ı won't doubt the "antagonism" . Though this unmentionable back room thing presumes an unbreakable bond among the party that can be identified , the French are to be a solid block . De Gaulle takes his orders from Petain , for the duration . There is a war going on , the unavailable Spitfires has cut a bloody swathe in the ranks of the Luftwaffe and Germans are relieved the thorn of Dunkerque has been removed without too much fuss . Which seems bloody betrayal to the French , to those who remember how perfidious Albion could be in the days before Entente Cordiale . Mind you , the French are actively joining London in name-calling the Belgians for chickening out of the war , treason is in the air .

You want the backroom stuff on the French govt in the summer of 1940 and thereabouts? Excellent. It's entirely possible to read up on this.

It was a hellishly confused situation with the govt having vacated Paris for temporary accomodation in Bordeaux. Telephone lines weren't sufficient, govt members were impossible to get hold of, and there was a bit of a stink when one of the ministers left top secret papers in the flat of his mistress, whom he had brough along.

What's important in the incessant preassure on Reynaud by the CiC Weygand to have the French government surrender to the Germans to spare the French army the ignominity of having to surrender on its own accord. Cabinett meetings saw Weygand darkly hinting that if Reynaud didn't comply the French army would take matters in their own hands and stage a military coup. It seems the main party on the political side Weygand was discussing all this with was - surprise, surprise - Pétain.

One source for all of this are of course the memoires of the British liason offcier Spears. He even was instrumental in getting de Gaulle on that plane to London.

Other sources for the situation are the memoires, and interviews with, senior British cabinett members, Anthony Eden for preference. Iirc Eden in interviews described episodes where it was damn clear that one of Reynaud's confidants was de Gaulle, and Reynaud and de Gaulle wanted to fight on even if it meant the French army had to surrender on its own, as long as the French government was free to act and continue in the war.

It was Reynaud who sent de Gaulle to negotiate with the British which threw up the amazing suggestion, and document, that France and the UK join in a union for the duration of the war. Jean Monet and his UK opposites came up with it, sold it to de Gaulle, who sold it to Churchill, and then to Reynaud. Only then was the proposal shot down in the French cabinett due to opposition from people like Weygand and Pétain.

In the end Weygand's campaign of veiled threats managed to force Reynaud to step down, at which point an apparently well-prepared Pétain immediately stepped up. Just prior to this I've seen an interview with Eden describing a cabinett meeting where de Gaulle arrived late, was invited by Weygand to sit next to him, but refused, which caused some raised eybrows, but ostentatiously took his place next to Reynaud instead. After the meeting, Reynaud and Eden walked out together and saw Petain apparently in a very good mood, at which Reynaud leaned over to Eden and whispered: "He's in a good mood. He must be planning something odius (néfaste)."

The things is Pétain wanted to surrender, to end the slaughter of the French troops, and halt the destruction of French towns and villages, which had apparently shocked him terribly. (Which is ironic, since the material destruction in France in 1940 was very limited compared to the flattening of entire cities the war would later bring.)

Weygand absolutely refused to have the French army surrender, but didn't want it to have to keep fighting the Germans, since that wasn't working out. Weygand, a monarchist antisemite, at that point was perfectly happy to put the enitre French Republic (remember, he was a monarchist) on the German chopping-block if it spared the French army. But if that was done, if the Republic of France surrendered, then France would officially out of the war. This Reynaud and de Gaulle did not want. In the end Reynaud buckled under the preassure, and de Gaulle absconded to London to fight on no matter what, never recognising the surrender.

The differences in position and the principles involved went well beyond stuff that could be worked out in back-room deals. Free French forces were killing Vichyists in Syria in 1941 as part of Operation Exporter. Admiral Darlan had to die to get him out of the way. Nothing in the conflict between Vichy and the Free French even at the inception of things allows for some kind of secret connivance between them. What would that be?
"We're OK with you killing us in the name of France, which you want to be republican in the tradition of 1789, while we want to be either at least slightly Fascist, but some of us would like to recall the Bourbon dynasty."
There were fundamental conflicts over principles and what kind of place France should be. And that's still leaving the Communuists out of it.

One can get an idea of the clandestine war in France between Vichy and the Free French agents from things like the 1969 film "Army of Shadows". The victors did exact payment in blood at the liberation of France as well, with a string of non-authorised killings. The hatred and violence between the sides simply ran too deep to be encapsulated in, or contained by, any kind of dealmaking between men in back-rooms.

[r16]

fell short of my expectations over the weekend , a little of my points the posts ı have starting here . Will do a few things to balance my apparent anti-de Gaulle bias .

apart from that , ı would say not many differences from a certain vantage point even if there will be a big divergence in the end , from other view points .

[SeekTruthFromFacts]

Originally Posted by JEELEN

That times were dear was also obvious from the fact that rationing became critical (only to be abolished at war´s end).

Originally Posted by Lord Baal

Actually, rationing wasn't abolished until some time after the war. I'm not sure of the exact date, unfortunately, but I believe it was late-1945. ...

Both way off. Rationing did not end until 1954, and was actually worse after the War than during it. The example that always sticks in my mind is bread. In 1940, Lord Woolton, the Minister of Food, said that rationing bread would be "the last resort of a starving nation" and would never happen. Bread rationing was introduced in 1946 and potato rationing in 1947.

I'd love to chat about the reasons for that, but this isn't the right thread. What would it be appropriate is a link to Lord Baal's argument that the British Empire and China could have won alone. Just a gentle reminder. ;-) I will need some persuading.

[Theige]

So it was never the British Empire could do it by themselves, they always needed China, the most populous nation on earth, to help them.

It's still preposterous.

The United States however, could definitely have beaten the Axis all by itself.

[innonimatu]

Originally Posted by Lord Baal

The Allies always had the strength to invade Germany. The French could have marched all the way to Berlin in September 1939 if they had so chosen. They lacked two things; the will to act in any way other than preparing for a new WWI; and any decent generals capable of thinking on their feet. De Gaulle was the only one the French had, and he wasn't promoted from Colonel until after his savage counterattack against the German invasion won him the immediate respect of the French cabinet.

I think r16 is right about the Western Front becoming a stalemate - since there really wasn't anywhere else the Germans could break through; they were lucky enough to pull it off in OTL - but that would only be temporary. The Western Allies were so much stronger than the Germans that it would only be a matter of time before the French broke through, especially if the British sent reinforcements in large numbers. I think the last chance for the German High Command to oust Hitler was March 1939, but with French and British troops on German soil there's a good chance that someone like Rommel or Beck would simply take over, officially or otherwise, much as Hindenburg and Ludendorrf had done during WWI.

I don't see the West giving them anything for Poland; in fact, Germany would be lucky to retain Austria. Germany would probably escape without any more territorial concessions, though the Free City of Danzig would likely be given to Poland.

Thanks, this seems to have been the last direct answer to my question. But you seem to disagree with r16 on how things would evolve out of that stagnated western front: he assumes that Germany would still risk war against the USSR, you figure that the generals would oust Hitler and negotiate some peace agreement.

I don't see the generals allowing Hitler to start a war against the USSR. But I guess that it might happen if they couldn't secure peace on the west. Out of fear of the growing power of the USSR, and hope that the western allies would then make peace so as to allow the germans to have a go at the USSR. It's something I can see happening if the "drole de guerre" dragged on for at least a couple of years more.

So the questions I'd like to put now are:
- would the allies follow up on a defeat of the german offensive of May 1940 with a counter-attack and manage to enter Germany and force some peace?
- If the allies also stood put, would the Wehrmacht likely move to quickly oust the Nazis and negotiate peace, or might the stalemate drag on until that war against the USSR happened? How was blame for a failure in the attack against France likely to be apportioned in Germany, if the allies also failed to make good on their victory?

[wolfigor]

Originally Posted by innonimatu

I don't see the generals allowing Hitler to start a war against the USSR. But I guess that it might happen if they couldn't secure peace on the west. Out of fear of the growing power of the USSR, and hope that the western allies would then make peace so as to allow the germans to have a go at the USSR. It's something I can see happening if the "drole de guerre" dragged on for at least a couple of years more.

I am not sure that Germany would have made war against SSSR after failing to break the French.
In this scenario Germany went from victory to victory but ultimately failing the great western offensive.
This would have a huge impact on morale and a very clear parallel with WWI that nobody would be able to ignore.
Without a clear victory in the west Germany would not have had the freedom to move enough troops to the eastern front to start barbarossa.
Hitler's aura of invincibility would be tarnished and it would be not possible for him to convince the generals to start war on a new front.

Maybe at this point WWII would become a second round of WWI but maybe diplomacy could get a second chance.
In 1940 the war was still "young" without the huge hate and atrocities that came later: possibilities for compromise were still open especially if Hitler was ousted (possible in this scenario because of having lost his aura of invincibility).

Originally Posted by innonimatu

- would the allies follow up on a defeat of the german offensive of May 1940 with a counter-attack and manage to enter Germany and force some peace?

It really depends how bad was the Wehrmacht's failure: if the losses were big enough the allies may have decided to be bold.
However in a more average case the allies would have followed the line of least risk: the memory of the WWI slaughters on the western front was still very strong and the allies would be extremely careful before committing to a general massive offensive.

With France in the war it would be easier to choke German's economy and diplomacy toward SSSR to make it more effective.

In the meantime UK and France would have had a field day in the Mediterranean and North Africa against Italy (if they would have ever entered the war at this point).
Italy was unable to resist UK alone, much less chances for them to win against both France and UK.

[r16]

One can get an idea of the clandestine war in France between Vichy and the Free French

not to distract from the new heading the thread has taken , but those who have waddled through my posts all around might remember that ı surf at web cafes to collect stuff and write at home . So here is a little more on the French internal issues derived mostly from current Turkish affairs

Spoiler:

with all due respect , that people clashed eventually does not necessarily mean that they didn't start in cahoots .

once again we see it from present life . There is a professor who would take it as an insult if he was ever called a Kemalist , yet it took weeks to pry him out of the long standing "Kemalist" history foundation . Not by me of course , ı am in the Starfleet . Yet this guy who was number two to the leading Fascist of Istanbul in those coup days when the Turkish Fuehrer went into hiding for a couple of days unsure whether the Coup people were Commies , Fascies or dirt simple Americanies , this guy who was clean shaven for years yet now has grown an "Islamic beard" , this democrat who appears anywhere necessary and unnecessary , has just asked for return of the death penalty . Not for Seperatist leaders who have been running the terror campaign from a safe and cozy Turkish prison since 1999 , not for sex offenders , not for the jerks who speed past you through puddles on rainy days to give you a free shower of cold water and mud . No only for coup plotters , past and present , so that nobody can dare dry to topple the democracy . And hanging will not suffice . Oily stakes ... Turkish curricula doesn't have much in the way of what that is , but ı guess it is something like that happens in that Nobel winner by Ivo Andrich , if ı am not mistaken in the name .

this impassionate plea gets followed by reminding people that his father was in the military and both his parents are Turkish . Eh ? Makes sense , since his former colleagues have turned Kemalist these days , as the Left Centre party who would fill that position is currently desperate to engage pro-goverment Kurds so that they will also vote for them . America bans engaging those with seperatist tendencies as they happen to be the stick when carrot in Turkey does not work . Indeed , the reason for this well balanced speech is America has now started to pressure the successful architests of the Police Coup of these last years . Long before they get everything under control , before they really dominate every single piece of state apparatus , America demands release of people from jails , so that their paid friends can benefit from the doubts developing from the legal process to walk free and better organize the "civil war " that awaits us . Dear proffessor , your enemy is this dude Riccardone , the US Ambrassador to Ankara . Stake him ...

what , too tough ? Makes sense indeed . It was US and Europe that engineered the change in Turkey and not some power in Turkey ...Which leads to career liberals to cry foul of the system on a just-in-time basis . One dude , whose father was famous for getting beaten in the parliament as a Labour MP and talking so good of USN carriers because you know we miserable Turks/Muslims are unworthy of existing because we don't have any carriers , yeah that dude who became a journalist like his famous journalist dad is on the news to complain about how the goverment keeps the media under control with money paid for official ads . Didn't hear him talking on the subject before he was fired from the job he held as the director of this rabidly pro-goverment newspaper . As prophesied years ago , the new revolution in Turkey is not meant to make new kings , but to fatally weaken this country ; especially by sabotaging necessary reforms by the perception of make-believe reforms that are supposed to be currently taking place , when this country falls as some foreigner presses the button , nobody will have the desire to remark that there was still some hope in Turkey . Which means just like paying tribute to Mustafa Kemal does not make the lights go on in this country or get Syria invaded , so that our "allies" in the Gulf can invade us one day , having Turkish parents will not raise regiments to fight the enemies of the new order .

a Turkish saying is apt for the situation though ı must paraphrase it as ı was never real : You are 40 people , and you all know each other .

all done by people who started in the very same cradle .

will not claim to have all the answers to any questions . And obviously there were clashes between Vichy and the Free French . Which then leads to the question what happened later on ? France was vulnerable as a colonial power in 1945 ? Which led to kiss and make peace ? Only Laval was hanged , because he acted impossibly in court , or maybe he acted so because he knew there had to be sacrifices for the image of France and his head would roll irregardless ? Our daily news intake here in Turkey certainly leads us to think appearances do not necesarily tell the truth ... At least the whole truth .

and that anti-Semitism thing . Which European politician , soldier , intellectual or celebrity of the day was not an anti-Semite ? It is only the present day -modified from British- American approach gives any credibility to Jews , because you know they happen to be a good stick in the Middle Eastern environment ; their power at the end of the day ... Is real as much as the Protocols of Zion was real . Even American Right will turn the other cheek , to look the other way , if higher interests of the white people demand Holocaust II , they certainly didn't do much during the first one , them Americans ...

[r16]

on the new heading of the thread let me say that a war in East was inevitable , no matter what happened in France , and Germans could still strike first , because Stalin was getting stronger everyday . Which certainly helps alot to understand the Western inaction until May 1940 .

[ParkCungHee]

Originally Posted by Theige

So it was never the British Empire could do it by themselves, they always needed China, the most populous nation on earth, to help them.

Yes, but, as we established earlier, China suffered a severe manpower shortage in WWII.

At any rate, the involvement of China is not necessary for any tremendous contributions of the Chinese army, but one of logistics.

[kittenOFchaos]

The topic of debate is "What would have happened if france had held the Meuse in 1940?".

I'm not going to waste words. Time and again the German forces proved far superior to those of Britain and France - a setback on the Meuse would not have spared France defeat as our forces were never at the races. Throughout WW2 the performance of the British Army (never mind the French) was at best worrying when facing German forces - only through vast superiority of force was anything achieved and that was only possible due to fighting in locations where it was difficult for Germany to muster force and when the German army was busy fighting on the Eastern Front.

Only when we got to fight Italians or sink French ships did we get a chance to shine - the rest was an awful lot of effort against a small fraction of the German military in the grand scheme of things.

As for the idea that the British Empire could defeat both Germany and Japan. Japan could sweep the Royal Navy from the Indian Ocean and it is pretty much goodnight for the British Empire outside of Canada.

[Verbose]

Originally Posted by kittenOFchaos

The topic of debate is "What would have happened if france had held the Meuse in 1940?".

I'm not going to waste words. Time and again the German forces proved far superior to those of Britain and France - a setback on the Meuse would not have spared France defeat as our forces were never at the races.

Well, there's a school of thought suggesting the Germane need for speed wasn't just because they could, but also because they had to wrap things up quickly if possible. The chance France might have had of evening things out would have depended on the size of the German fuel stockpile.

I.e. if the French would have managed to stall the Germans for perhaps not a single week, but possibly a couple, then the Germans might have started to deplete the carburants stockpiled for the campaign, at which point the pace of the German campaign would have slowed down not due to brilliant French action, but for running out of petrol. A fortnights delay after the breakthrough at Sedan would also have allowed the Plan Weygand to succeed, where France would pull divisions it actually did still have, just nowhere in the right places, and reconstitute a 60 division frontline. The problem of course being that there was not good reason for the Germans to let up and allow them the time. Espcially if carburants was after all a not endless commodity for the Wehrmacht.

[Theige]

Originally Posted by ParkCungHee

Yes, but, as we established earlier, China suffered a severe manpower shortage in WWII.

At any rate, the involvement of China is not necessary for any tremendous contributions of the Chinese army, but one of logistics.

No, that was not established, you just continue to be vague and obtuse in your statements.

[Lord Baal]

Guys, I'm working on finding that post. But I've been here a few years now, and wherever it is, it must have been bumped at some point because it's not in the last five pages of my subscriptions. When I find it, I'll also respond to the few other questions that have accumulated.