Massacre of Dunkirk

Markus

Banned
Cutting off th BEF and French before they reached the coast is also difficult to impossible.

No, it´s not. Due to the unwillingness of the Belgians to leave Belgian terrian the pocket got shaped like an upside-down L. If the Germans had attacked where the Belgian and British sectors met and broken through, Gort would have had no reserves to plug the gap. If I got it right, that´s what happened in Noravea´s scenario.

bbcnewsdunkirkevacuatio.jpg
 
I will post Part II later tonight. It pretty much involves the following...

-Destroying the encircled French and British Armies
-Occupying the Rest of France
-Hitler Trusting his Generals more


Any ideas while I'm writing would be helpful.
 
what's the liklihood that Britain would've looked for peaceterms at this point? Seeing as the most of the British army's personelle and military equipment have all been lost, + fears of a German invasion, wouldn't it be more likely than not that some attempt might be made to broker a peace?
 

nova2010

Banned
There is no need to wipe out the BEF. It would be more beneficial if the Germans made them to surrender and taken the majority of them as POW. They could put them out of action and use them as propaganda tool in order to influence the British public opinion and force Britain to peace negosiations.
 
No, it´s not. Due to the unwillingness of the Belgians to leave Belgian terrian the pocket got shaped like an upside-down L. If the Germans had attacked where the Belgian and British sectors met and broken through, Gort would have had no reserves to plug the gap. If I got it right, that´s what happened in Noravea´s scenario.

bbcnewsdunkirkevacuatio.jpg

Which was why it looked like a possibility he moved forces so as to create that reserve....
 

Cook

Banned
No, it´s not. Due to the unwillingness of the Belgians to leave Belgian terrian the pocket got shaped like an upside-down L. If the Germans had attacked where the Belgian and British sectors met and broken through, Gort would have had no reserves to plug the gap.

Breakthrough with what; all of the panzer divisions were by that time south of the pocket weren’t they?
The B.E.F. only faced infantry didn't they?

The Panzer divisions would have had to been extracted from the front, replaced and redeployed north, all on very narrow, very congested roads. The traffic jab would have been enormous.
 
The psychology is the significant thing - Dunkirk was spun as almost a victory by Churchill in his famous speech to the Commons and there was a real sense of unity and pulling together as the troops returned...

There are elements in the Conservative Party who were strongly opposed to Churchill (more supportive of Halifax and Chamberlain). Could they have pushed a new motion of No Confidence ? It seems unlikely to succeed given the fact that the Prime Minister has been in office less than three weeks.

The demoralising effect of the Dunkirk Surrender "could" have made the British more receptive to peace feelers from Hitler via Bastanini or some other third party. In the same way, outright victory would have made Hitler even more disposed toward seeking a peace settlement.

This makes a lot of sense; does this mean Britain sitting out the war is more of a possibility with a Dunkirk disaster?
 
With the ime loss and the blunting of the spearhead division due to the Dunkirk battle, the french army manages to retreat from the Maginot line and build up a coherent defence line .
Paris is evacuated and the government relocate at Bordeaux.
Proclams about "resisting the invaders like we did in the last war" are spread.
Sabotage begin to take its toll in occupied areas, where franc-tireurs begin annoying the german army.
In short, the battle of Dunkirk means that war in France is still going on
 

Cook

Banned
...the french army manages to retreat from the Maginot line and build up a coherent defence line .

The Bulk of the French Army, including its best divisions, were all in the mobile armies that were cut off in Belgium. The remainder were poorer quality, which was why they’d been posted to the Maginot Line, where mobility and counter-attack would not be required.

And the following Battle for France, although it included the Panzer Divisions, was largely an invasion by a German Army whos infantry were on foot and that used draft horses to move its artillery.
 
The Bulk of the French Army, including its best divisions, were all in the mobile armies that were cut off in Belgium. The remainder were poorer quality, which was why they’d been posted to the Maginot Line, where mobility and counter-attack would not be required.

And the following Battle for France, although it included the Panzer Divisions, was largely an invasion by a German Army whos infantry were on foot and that used draft horses to move its artillery.

However, the following following Battle for France was essentially based on shock.
Most of the french army was unscathed and it was still a dangerous foe, had it decided to fight (see Great War for further details).
Panzer and mechanized units were the main mean to induce such a shock.
Blunting them and giving time to recover from the awe would mean the risk of the french building trenches.
 

Cook

Banned
Most of the french army was unscathed and it was still a dangerous foe, had it decided to fight Panzer and mechanized units were the main mean to induce such a shock.
Blunting them and giving time to recover from the awe would mean the risk of the french building trenches.

The Bulk of the French Army, including its best divisions, were all in the mobile armies that were cut off in Belgium. The remainder were poorer quality, which was why they’d been posted to the Maginot Line, where mobility and counter-attack would not be required.

The B.E.F. were only a very small part (6 divisions) of the Anglo-French Armies that marched north into Belgium and were subsequently trapped by the German advance through the Ardennes.
 
Top