Vichy Question - Meaningful Alliance/Collaboration Possible?
- Thread starter Geredis
- Start date
thaddeus
Donor
I was agreeing with you & providing a supporting point
sorry, wasn't sure if my post was jumbled.
after thinking for a while Vichy could have been turned into valuable ally or co-belligerent it really seems implausible.
should have moved Case Anton up about a year.
There are arguments for that. The events in the east sort of went out of control for the German leaders & they seem to have been gambling the French would follow the armistice and properly resist any Allied invasion of North Africa, elsewhere.
Now, from our perspective, it seems obvious that French forces, even Vichy forces would not resist a 'liberation' army. Was the German refusal to bolster Vichy forces with a larger Army a matter of them truly believing that Vichy forces would be of sufficient quality to repel any invasion in North Africa? Or is it more about German naivete, refusing to believe that, given the mess that was Dieppe that the Allies could never launch a plausible or effective amphibious assault in sufficient numbers to actually threaten Vichy Africa?
I'm thinking a mix of both.
Certainly naievite. There was the example of the French resisting the invasion of Syria, and some resistance against the Japanese, even tho Japan had Germanys blessing in its decision to occupy French Indochina. Still the plans for Case Anton were up dated and the forces in France reinforced a bit. so, Hitler & Co were not entirely clueless in this.