Why France was defeated in 1940

What the actual reason France was defeated in 1940 and instead of keep on fighting from colonies surrendered?
 
Last edited:
What actual WWII military history books have you read already? Because that question is best answered through study.
 
Because France was not able to cooperate effectively with its allies, compounded buy a poor communication system and the Germans doing something they did not expect. The French command staff was utterly helpless when the German panzers started rolling through the Ardennes.
 

Khanzeer

Banned
I think because germans were just too good to be stopped in 1940, in all fairness I do not think the french performed so poorly but their opponents were literally re-writing the rules of the game.In such a situation you cannot expect much from the rather competent but rather unimaginative french high command
 
From watching Indy Naidell expalin World War II week by week, I have learned that the Allies had no idea what the hell they were doing. Their command structure was a jumbled mess while the German command structure was clean and organized.

A explanation of the command structures of both sides


Indy talks about a embarrassing incident which typifies the disorganization of the Allied response to the German invasion

 
If you can read French, the current Guerres et Histoire magazine had an extended article explaining how the french Army wasted the victory of 1918 and lost in 1940. It is based on the latest research.
There's a back issue with an extended article on just how bad Gamelin was as a leader.
Basically, the industrial effort was started late and poorly coordinated, mostly due to badly formulated military requirements; the doctrine required good staff work and decent strategic options to work, both of which lacked (the French Army was built to a very specific plan and fought with another) and long standing political divisions within the Army exarcebated poor (in Gamelin case very poor) leadership.
For example, military intelligence warned of the possibility of "Plan Yellow", but this warning was buried under multiple others and rejected by the people in higher level operations cells, that regarded the guys in Intel as being a bunch of right wing paranoids any way.
533-guerres-histoire.jpg
 
For example, military intelligence warned of the possibility of "Plan Yellow", but this warning was buried under multiple others and rejected by the people in higher level operations cells, that regarded the guys in Intel as being a bunch of right wing paranoids any way.

Wow, really? Did the guys in Intelligence know the Germans were going to cut through the Ardennes or just that the invasion was imminent?
 
They were one of the true Western Democracy answerable to their electorate who really really did not want another European war

Not for them the throwing of unsustainably large %s of GDP at the Military in the mid to late 30s allowing for a rapid and relatively sudden advantage in military strength over their neighbors

Germany due to said banking practices allowing for their rapid and unprecedented military expansion had a window of about 12 - 18 months before the British and French war industries backed by the ever expanding US industries totally eclipsed them militarily

Basically France was not ready for the war that it did not want to fight - there was a lot of it about in 1939/41

The other thing France needed was a 'Gallic' Gen Marshal - basically fire or sideline all of the existing 'older' generals and promote younger and less hide bound men into their place.
 
Wow, really? Did the guys in Intelligence know the Germans were going to cut through the Ardennes or just that the invasion was imminent?
One officer in military Intel warned about the possibility of a strike through the Ardennes. Army HQ asked tank experts to review the report and they dismissed it. But at higher levels most reports were formulated in "cover your ass"style listing all possibilities and not really commiting to one.
 
What other possibilities were there for a German invasion?
Through Belgium, directly against the Maginot line, etc.
The French plan was to stay on the defensive to move from peace time low readiness (due to a short term national service among other factors) and then to wear down the Germans in a series of "directed battle" offensives. Going into Belgium was not a part of the Plan. The Plan was revised to include a forward deployment into Belgium while leaving a reserve to cover the Ardennes. Then Gamelin revised it again to extend the deployment into Belgium forward and to include in it the forces originaly meant as a reserve. This was the worst possible option.
 
What other possibilities were there for a German invasion?
Through Belgium, directly against the Maginot line, etc.
The French plan was to stay on the defensive to move from peace time low readiness (due to a short term national service among other factors) and then to wear down the Germans in a series of "directed battle" offensives. Going into Belgium was not a part of the Plan. The Plan was revised to include a forward deployment into Belgium while leaving a reserve to cover the Ardennes. Then Gamelin revised it again to extend the deployment into Belgium forward and to include in it the forces originaly meant as a reserve. This was the worst possible option.
 
The Plan was revised to include a forward deployment into Belgium while leaving a reserve to cover the Ardennes. Then Gamelin revised it again to extend the deployment into Belgium forward and to include in it the forces originaly meant as a reserve. This was the worst possible option.

No kidding. This sounds like the plan they went with.
 
No kidding. This sounds like the plan they went with.
And the bad planning was on top of wasting the seven months before the German attack without a serious effort to get the units into full operational capability despite the fact that doing so in the first six months was an integral part of the plan.
 
Top