The rapid victory of Hitler against France and UK (1940).

May 2017
1,114
France
#1
Hello everybody and dear specialists.Can we consider that the german control of the tchecoslovaquian arsenal (weapons,usines of SKODA) has permitted to Hitler to win rapidly his war against France and UK in may-june 1940 ?
 
Oct 2013
14,533
Europix
#2
Hello everybody and dear specialists.Can we consider that the german control of the tchecoslovaquian arsenal (weapons,usines of SKODA) has permitted to Hitler to win rapidly his war against France and UK in may-june 1940 ?
I don't think so.

Taking over the Check heavy industry was clearly a bonus for the Germans. But it isn't what won the French campaign.

What permitted Germany's quick win in the French campaign remains fundamentally the Allied multiples failures.
 
Dec 2011
1,335
Belgium
#3
dupuydumazeldan,

I join deaf tuner in his opinion, a bonus but of no importance in the Case Red. Your title is a bit misleading, there was no victory against the UK in 1940. deaftuner, said: "What permitted Germany's quick win in the French campaign remains fundamentally the Allied multiples failures." In my opinion it were more the failures of the French high command and the fact of not be prepaired for a modern war, thinking still in a static war as for instance about the role of the aviation and the closed air support as the role of the tank weapon
 
Likes: sparky

redcoat

Ad Honorem
Nov 2010
7,783
Stockport Cheshire UK
#5
Hello everybody and dear specialists.Can we consider that the german control of the tchecoslovaquian arsenal (weapons,usines of SKODA) has permitted to Hitler to win rapidly his war against France and UK in may-june 1940 ?
It was the speed of the German advance and their ability to react rapidly to the changing situation due to a massive investment in radio communications that the French were unable to cope with.
 
Likes: Futurist
Dec 2011
1,335
Belgium
#6
dupuydumazeldan,

I join deaf tuner in his opinion: a bonus but of no importance in the Case Red. Your title is a bit misleading, there was no victory against the UK in 1940. deaftuner, said: "What permitted Germany's quick win in the French campaign remains fundamentally the Allied multiples failures." In my opinion it were more the failures of the French high command and the fact of not to be prepaired for a modern war, thinking still in a static war as for instance about the role of the aviation and the close air support as the role of the tank weapon, although already prepared by general Estienne the father of the tank weapon after WWI and de Gaulle

I started for the first time on the BBC history messageboard about the question now more than ten years ago with the lengthy thread: Defending the French in their 1940 defeat. One has no access anymore to the thread while the BBC closed recently the file.
But we had a long debate on Le Monde en Guerre and as you, I suppose, understand French
Forum Le Monde en Guerre - Mai-juin 40, un éclairage différent ?
And also on Passion Histoire we discussed it nearly to dead:
Forum Histoire - Passion Histoire • Page d’index
Recently I bought the book "Case Red The Collapse of France" from Robert Forczick and discussed it on a small English language forum
Case Yellow, Case Red and Sealion - Page 2

I have for the moment no time to make a survey of all the discussions that I had on the different fora, but with the sources I mentioned you can perhaps make some comments on which we then can discuss further.

Kind regards, Paul.
 
Jan 2015
3,362
Front Lines of the Pig War
#8
It was the speed of the German advance and their ability to react rapidly to the changing situation due to a massive investment in radio communications that the French were unable to cope with.
Correct, also the failure to recognise the changes in warfare brought about by mechanization, the French envisioned tanks would be used more like mobile pillboxes in static warfare, rather than the "Schwerpunkt" or mobile battle envisioned by Germany.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,022
SoCal
#9
It was the speed of the German advance and their ability to react rapidly to the changing situation due to a massive investment in radio communications that the French were unable to cope with.
Correct, also the failure to recognise the changes in warfare brought about by mechanization, the French envisioned tanks would be used more like mobile pillboxes in static warfare, rather than the "Schwerpunkt" or mobile battle envisioned by Germany.
Do you think that, had the French properly secured the Ardennes, the German invasion would have still succeeded? Or would such a French move have allowed France to survive in spite of its other weaknesses (such as not being able to react rapidly and not recognizing that warfare has changed since 1918)?
 
May 2017
1,114
France
#10
For the four armoured divisions,the first of the general Bruneau,the second of the general Bruche,the third of the general Brocard and the fourth of the general de Gaulle, only the third had an aviation of observation ,composed with nine planes.
 

Similar History Discussions