French Surrender, Good or Bad?

Jun 2012
39
Scotland
Today is 22nd June 2012, the 72nd Anniversary of the Surrender of France in WWII. What I want to know is, do you think France did the right thing? Or could they have done more before surrendering to Axis Forces?
 
Sep 2010
558
I think they were pretty much done. the government was in a panic their forces in disarray. sure they might have held out a lttle longer but the end was inevitable
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
6,107
The French government should never have surrendered. The French army would have been forced to surrender at some point (probably not the airforce, and certainly not the navy). The problem was how the senior French military command preassured the civilian politicians to have the entire republic surrender to the Germans, to spare the French armed forces the ignominity. Big political mistake.
 

unclefred

Ad Honorem
Dec 2010
6,731
Oregon coastal mountains
Should the Russians have surrendered when they were on the ropes?
 

irishcrusader95

Ad Honorem
Aug 2010
6,740
Ireland
the strategic situation was totally against them, any further resistance would have just delayed the inevitable and cost needless deaths. they did not have the luxury of plenty of land to retreat into like the russians once they had been smashed in the first attacks. its fault lies with the generals who screwed things up rather then with the common soldiers who fought hard through it all, even after the Dunkirk evacuation they continued to resist for a few more weeks.
 
May 2012
3,727
Nonbeing which is to say everywhere
Very true Irish. If any of the cities had fought rhe Germans they would simply have been bombed and destroyed. Possibly a regrouping of French forces in southern France or at least a withdrawal to a french colony or such was needed.
 

Tairusiano

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
2,979
Brazil
In a Allied point of view the surrender is bad but the french army had been defeated keep fighting only serve to bring death to the French people then for the french the surrender is good, in my humble opinion this was a decision made in difficult times
they choose i think the less harmful option
 

betgo

Ad Honorem
Jul 2011
6,692
They also got the best deal they could. All of France wasn't occupied and they maintained a French state of sorts.
 
Dec 2011
259
Romania
In my opinion it was a disaster: politically the French were suffering from this surrender for at least three generations after WWII.

What could have been done? What de Gaulle did. Abandon the territory (maybe the whole Metropolitan French) to the enemy and regroup in Britain and French North Africa. They could have attacked the Italians in Libya from Algeria and Tunisia, their fleet together with the British one would have bled dry the Axis in the Mediteranean and their air force together with the RAF would have been the nightmare of the Luftwaffe.

De Gaulle saved the honour of France, without him I do not see France after WW2 as say permanent member of the Security Council.

The Vichy regime was a catastrophe. They were not regarded as allied by the Germans and still they produced the useless waste of life in the Levant.
 

Mangekyou

Ad Honorem
Jan 2010
7,968
UK
They were completely outmanouvered. There was not much more they could have done without causing needless deaths. What they did do was continue the struggle for France through the various guerilla and resistance groups.