Everybody dies

WI all the countries invaded by the Axis mounted a defense as effective as the Dutch but as suicidal as the Russians? Do we have a significantly shortened WWII?
 
HECK YES! The USSR falls within weeks, same with China and the other countries that bled the Axis dry. Then, with so many casualties from the sucidal tactics, there is far less in the way of resistance movements. This could actually be the one thing that lets German/Japanese goals of massive empires actually possible. The very idea, however, of the French fighting that sucidally or the Russians as ineffectiveley as the Dutch is ASB.
 
This assumption shows a typically biased and uninformed thread starter.

Yes, the regular Dutch army didn't amount to much and gave up the Grebbe Line without much fighting.

OTOH, the Dutch marines, air force and a few regular units fought extremely well around The Hague and Rotterdam, inflicting very heavy casualties on German paratroopers and their relieving forces. Their stubborn resistance led to the decision to "terror bomb" Rotterdam to force the Dutch into surrendering.

The Dutch air force and AA gunners destroyed 271 aircraft (mostly Ju 52), effectively destroying Germany's airborne capability for a year.

If only the French at Sedan had fought as hard (since they were pretty much similar in level of equipment and training) or for that matter, the BEF instead of scurrying away to the nearest port.
 
If you were that well informed, you would know that the BEF had repelled any frontal attacks on their forces. They were forced to retreat as the forces on either side of them were falling apart and they would otherwise have been surrounded
 
HECK YES! The USSR falls within weeks, same with China

You can drive through Holland, border to border, in a couple of days, leisurely.
Now try driving border to border, today, not in 1940 or 1941, in Ukraine+Russia, or in China. You have to carry your own fuel and food and spare parts. Have a good journey and when you come back, tell us how much time it took you.
 
Re: peteratwar response:

Absolutely correct mate. Bloody King Leopold..disgraceful. We won't talk about other nationalities.
 
If only the French at Sedan had fought as hard (since they were pretty much similar in level of equipment and training) or for that matter, the BEF instead of scurrying away to the nearest port.

Yawn, you know the BEF rear headquarters was attacked when the main force was still fighting, join the dots about how that can happen. You also might want to spare a thought for the second line infantry without heavy weapons deployed there who stood and fought against enemy tanks.

Congratulations on using your ignorance to insult war dead.

For that matter you might look at some of the French units deployed on the Meuse who did fight hard, unfortunately at the wrong times and places.
 
Yawn, you know the BEF rear headquarters was attacked when the main force was still fighting, join the dots about how that can happen. You also might want to spare a thought for the second line infantry without heavy weapons deployed there who stood and fought against enemy tanks.

Congratulations on using your ignorance to insult war dead.

For that matter you might look at some of the French units deployed on the Meuse who did fight hard, unfortunately at the wrong times and places.


So defending the (not particularly effective fighting) of the British or French is okay but disparaging the Dutch and Belgians is perfectly alright. Although they suffered much heavier casualties in ratio than the British.

There is a word for someone like you and its spelled hypocrite.
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
 
So defending the (not particularly effective fighting) of the British or French is okay but disparaging the Dutch and Belgians is perfectly alright. Although they suffered much heavier casualties in ratio than the British.

There is a word for someone like you and its spelled hypocrite.
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

Please, point to exactly where I denigrated the Dutch or Belgians?

Beside, we weren't talking about effectiveness, but British and French resolve to point at all.
 
So defending the (not particularly effective fighting) of the British or French is okay but disparaging the Dutch and Belgians is perfectly alright. Although they suffered much heavier casualties in ratio than the British.

There is a word for someone like you and its spelled hypocrite.

casualties are never a guide to very much other than a lot of people got killed.

re the not very effective fighting (of the British) then please elaborate. The leadership at the top may have been iffy, the fighting man at the front was fine. Note the German General as he realised that so many had withdrawn to Britain remarked 'He did not want to be facing them on another day' Which of course he did.

The best troops in the world if surrounded will sooner or later all die. At least the British C-in-C had the moral courage to order the withdrawal to the coast rather than follow orders which would have lead to the destruction of the BEF. You can replace equipment within the year. Takes 18-20 years to produce more troops.

As to the French as has been said above, their fighting ability in some regiments was superb. Unfortunately too late and too little. If you dislocate the brain then the body doesn't function and that is basically what happened to the French High Command

By the way, there is no denigration of the Dutch and Belgian troops. Their soldiers fought bravely. Their commanders were not up to the job. Similar to the French army guarding the Ardennes front
 
Top