Donald Reaver
Donor
You mean he and his crew get pulled off the front line, and are feted and sent home to receive medals. Sent on tour and not sent near action again.
Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
Indeed, though the Press will be managed by his superiors in a way that is impossible today.
Of course, we are assuming that his troop is not overrun by Italian forces he has outflanked. Would his captive General want a firefight after which he could be released (if not killed by stray bullts/shells) or order any would be rescuers to surrender also.
Let's wait and see what our author has in mind.
I'm fairly sure the situation would have been radioed in, so reinforcements would have been sent promptly. Also, with two generals in full view, I imagine the Italians would have been a little more circumspect about attacking.
Just noticed this today on another pass through I wonder if he picked up an Beretta Modello 38 they were pretty highly sort after and were probably one of the best Italian firearms of WW2.
Well. How does Captain Peter Smith sound?
As an aside, that machine pistol would be third-hand or more by now - the Italians as far as I know or can find did not produce such a thing at this time, but they used the WWI vintage Steyr M1912 and probably a few more recent German guns in some cases.
Are you sure about that? The Italians were not as well trained or equipped as the British soldiers, of course, but they fought bravely for North Africa even after several crushing defeats. The French folded as soon as the Germans did something that ran contrary to what French strategic planning was counting on. The Italians getting their arses handed to them by the Greeks and needing to call uncle Adolf to help them can be chalked up to the Greeks being tough as nails, with even common soldiers the equals of other nations' elite mountain troops in skill and temperament.
Not my official stance, but I can definitely see more than a few people having this view of the matter.
Different situation, NA is a linear battlefield with flanking opportunities, France-Benelux is far more open, giving the Germans far more tactical options to appear in inconvenient places.
Six weeks of continuous battle with a continental peer army with over 100,000 losses is hardly folding, not to mention then having to tackle (well) a further other peer army. The Battle of France was hard fought on both sides. France was out manoeuvred, out generaled, and out commanded but not outfought. For one look at the heroic defence of Dunkirk along with their British allies. The fighting against Commonwealth forces in Syria was also hard fought and the battle for Madagascar went on longer than the Battle of France.
I was going to answer something like this, but @Icedaemon said : "not my official stance" so I forgot about it
How the French are seen post war will be heavily influenced by what happens at the Tunisian border. I don't think we can judge that by looking at Otl as the situation is now completely different.
1. The British have won every battle they've fought in North Africa, held Crete and only lost in Greece because the Greeks collapsed.
2. Britain hasn't seized Syria and Lebanon from Vichy
3. Vichy hasn't been occupied so is still neutral, if under the German thumb.
I'd say there's a 30 - 40% chance that Tunisia takes the chance to join the Free French.
1. The British have won every battle they've fought in North Africa, held Crete and only lost in Greece because the Greeks collapsed.
2. Britain hasn't seized Syria and Lebanon from Vichy
3. Vichy hasn't been occupied so is still neutral, if under the German thumb.
I'd say there's a 30 - 40% chance that Tunisia takes the chance to join the Free French.
For many soldiers, that is indeed a terrible fate. Willie Apiata VC, when told he had been awarded the VC responded "But I was just doing my job, boss". US Marine, John Basilone was awarded the Medal of Honour and put on a series of such tours, he repeatedly requested to be returned to combat because that was where he thought he belonged.
What territories do the free french have right? I can’t remember exactly but I think they may have some of the french Caribbean islands.
New Caledonia in the Pacific and Saint Pierre and Miquelon in the North Atlantic are all three Free French colonies.
Thanks for the though I have to wonder which way Syria and Lebanon will jump though more than Tunisia and French North Africa since they are a lot more isolated than Tunisia and pretty much in an area Dominated by British and Commonwealth forces.
Same goes for the Vichy African possessions since the Axis is about to get the boot entirely from Africa they mist be feeling a mix of dread and happiness right now.
If we're going by OTL, then at this point (November 1941) the largest Free French territory is French Equatorial Africa (from Chad to the French Congo). OTL Free French forces from Chad launched operations into Southern Libya in 1941-2. The Free French also have French India, New Caledonia and French Polynesia,
Saint Pierre and Miquelon weren't liberated OTL until December 1941 (after Pearl Harbor) and they were the first Free French territory in the Western Hemisphere. The French Caribbean colonies went over to the Free French in 1942-3. Vichy also has French North Africa, French West Africa, Syria/Lebanon, Madagascar and (nominally) Indochina.
My point was, as I said, not in regards to how I see these nations in this timeline, or for that matter how I expect historians and history buffs to really see things. Rather, I am suggesting that in this timeline's pop culture, modern-day French will be seen as lower in ability even than the Italians, at least in places. The British would have no desire to downplay their one clearly victorious theatre of war by making light of the Italians martial prowess, so some of the same allied propaganda which OTL made Rommel into the Desert Fox would be applied to making the Italians a near-peer foe in the eyes of the anglophone public. Meanwhile, the 'cheese eating surrender monkey' trope is still likely to be in play.
Compare that with the Battle of Poland where a numerically inferior force, using outdated weapons held off for nearly as long, and perhaps would have been longer had they not been attacked from the other side as well.
The Wehrmacht of 1939 was much less strong than the Wehrmacht of 1940, and while Panzerdivisions existed in 1939, they were too short of infantry, had too many light tanks ( 90ish Panzer III in the whole Heer) and were not given the freedom they had in 1940.