A Great Mistake

Discussion in 'General' started by Devil, Mar 24, 2005.

  1. Devil

    Devil Junior Member

    I red a book from William L. Shirer(The Rise and The Fall of the Third Reich)excuse for my bad english thats not my mother language (I come from the Balkan exactly Bosnia and Hercegovina and Iam 14 years old).When the Germans atacked Poland they left abaut 20 divisions at the border to France,but France had made a pact that binds them to atack Germani if they atack Poland.So the whole German army was in Poland but the France did not atacked withe more than 100 divisions equiped with heavy armor and weapons if they woud have atacked they woud strike directly into the heart of the German industry and maybe the war woud have come to a end.Do you think that it is a terible mistake of the Allies not to intervene then?Do you have additional informations abaut this and what do you think was it a mistake that costed million lives
     
  2. BrianP

    BrianP Member

    I know that the French made a limited offensive into the Saarland region of Germany right at the start of the war, but even that was turned back by the Germans. I think that it was just a matter of the French not being able to fully moblize their armed forces fast enough to launch a major offensive against Germany.
     
  3. Monti

    Monti Junior Member

    Not only France,but Great Britain has a pact with Poland,too.
    I think they ware waiting to see how it will be. Poland depend on allies help.
    But the biggest mistake was watching Hitler all the time and do nothing in years before the war.
     
  4. Kiwiwriter

    Kiwiwriter Very Senior Member

    I'm also unhappy with France's failure to attack in the Saar. People talk about Montgomery making excuses and not attacking, but the French defined that in September 1939. The "Saar Offensive" took 13 mostly uninhabited villages, had a few skirmishes, and lost most of its casualties to booby traps. Then they retreated.
     
  5. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    Originally posted by Kiwiwriter@Mar 28 2005, 02:48 PM
    I'm also unhappy with France's failure to attack in the Saar. People talk about Montgomery making excuses and not attacking, but the French defined that in September 1939. The "Saar Offensive" took 13 mostly uninhabited villages, had a few skirmishes, and lost most of its casualties to booby traps. Then they retreated.
    [post=32628]Quoted post[/post]
    And there was very little to stop the French if they had shown the inclination to attack. Hitler would have had real problems fighting on two fronts at that time. The French were in political turmoil throughout the 30's. Every time the Germans annexed territory the French were in the process of electing a new government. That coupled with the weariness and fear of leaving another generation on the fields of northern europe made sure that they wouldnt risk an attack. Far better to wait behind their "impregnable" maginot line!!
     
  6. Kiwiwriter

    Kiwiwriter Very Senior Member

    Even more so...the day Hitler invaded France and the Low Countries, Reynaud and Gamelin both quit. France was being invaded, and it had neither a generalissimo nor a government.
     
  7. Friedrich H

    Friedrich H Senior Member

    The great mistake was not attacking Germany in 1936, when the clumsy French war machine had all advantages on her side.

    In 1939, an Anglo-French attack in force against Western Germany simply couldn't have had any success at all. Why?

    First, the mobilisation of the mass French Army and the deployment of the small BEF were nowhere near the efficiency of 1914. Both Great Britain's and France's mobilisation and deployment systems were too awkard. Therefore, the French Army could not deploy the majority of its forces and launch an offensive until the 6th week after mobilisation, at the same time when the BEF had been completely deployed in the front.

    Now, général Gamelin had very little faith on an offensive because he accurately believed that it couldn't succeed without effective air support, something the Allies lacked in 1939. Not to mention that a an offensive launched in mid-October would have to be halted in a few weeks, once the one of the coldest winters in Western Europe arrived.

    An attack by the Allies was expected to start with a huge artillery barrage that would neutralise the German positions in the 'Siegfried Line'. To do this it would be required a bare minimum of 5.200 pieces of artillery in calibre from 75 to 400 mm. To amass such a concentration they would have needed to remove weapons from other fronts and this was not possbile and almost 50%+ of the French ammunition stocks dated from WWI. Therefore, in actual combat, nearly 40% of artillery shells did not go off. The Germans took notice of the incredibly high accuracy of French gunners, but thanked the age of a lot of their shells… duds :rolleyes:

    Also, it must be mentioned that the Franco-German border (created in 1815 in the Treaty of Luxembourg, after Napoléon's defeat), military, entirely favoured the Germans. All the defendable river-crossings, high ground and all naturally defendable positions were in the German side of the border…

    'Those damned French cause too many problems, let's favour militarily to the good guys in the neighbourhood…' :rolleyes:

    When the Germans atacked Poland they left abaut 20 divisions at the border to France

    False. In September 1st 1939 Army Group 'C' under colonel-general Wilhelm von Leeb, which defended the front between Basilee and Aachen, had 34 infantry divisions, 11 of which were first line fully-equipped units, plus 2/3 of the 22nd airborne division. However, on September 3rd, after the declaration of war, the OKW transferred 9 infantry divisions to the West, which were in position in the 'Westwall' by September 10th, thus totallising 43 divisions.

    So the whole German army was in Poland but the France did not atacked withe more than 100 divisions equiped with heavy armor and weapons if they woud have atacked they woud strike directly into the heart of the German industry and maybe the war woud have come to a end.

    100 divisions?! Not at all. By September 10th the French could only oppose 52 infantry, 3 cavalry and 2 motorised divisions. Add to this the unfavourable terrain, strong German defences and lack of fresh French ammunition stocks, Belgian neutrality, the fact that the BEF wouldn't be in line before October 10th, etcetera.
     

Share This Page