ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- Join The Channel for more perks : / @factbytes
One of the most dramatic and unexpected events of WWII, was the collapse of France and the Low Countries in 1940. France was the most powerful military power in the world at the time.
Britain, its ally, was the largest naval force. Both had greater economies than Germany, and could draw resources from the world's most powerful empires.
Yet, the Germans defeated France, Britain, Belgium, and the Netherlands in a short campaign.
The defeat of this formidable army, in under six weeks in 1940, stands as one of the most remarkable military campaigns in history.
Music Credits: All This Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons...
Copyright fair use notice
All media used in this video is used for the purpose of education under the terms of fair use.
All footage and images used belong to their copyright holders.
#BattleOfFrance #WW2 #FactBytes
To me it boils down to one thing. The French were too slow.
The German came in the back door with their forces concentrated and for many reasons the French were unable to assemble a force to stop them fast enough. They were always a dollar short and a day late.
One can blame fossilized Generals and command structure or obsolete tactics or the poor moral of the troops (just some of them, who happened to be at the point of the attack), or above all to me, the lack of modern communication equipment.
French Headquarters did not even have a phone much less a radio. They used runners or messengers. Can you believe it?
Every time they tried to counterattack hardly any French units showed up on time making the attacks uncoordinated (or much more than they would normally be which isn't saying much) or else the Germans were long gone and miles away from where the French thought they were. To the French the speed of the German advance was simply unbelievable. It blew their minds and they could not cope.
It didn't only blew the mind of the French, but also of the Poles, of the Danes, of the Norwegians, of the Dutch, of the Belgians, of the British.
it's also unbelievable that the german forces are outnumbered but still won
The Maginot line worked as planned. The Allies held firm in Belgium. The Allies lost because the Germans broke through at Sedan and the Allies simply could not destroy their bridge heads 14-16th May. The French knew the problem pretty quickly and scrambled all planes to try to destroy it and they sent reinforcements to close the gap. A combination of bad luck and a lack of high quality dive bombers caused this problem. Speed was part of it. The Germans got pretty lucky. th-cam.com/video/yWwLcykedcs/w-d-xo.html - great lecture here.
@@khylebaguingan8211 Read what Manstein had to say about it. The Germans concentrated forces, and outnumbered the enemy at the point of attack. An enemy can out number you overall, but if forces are dispersed, it does no good. It is outnumbering your enemy where you take the fight to them.
@@McDago100 I'm talking about the overall forces... The french are just stuck in ww1.. while the germans are pretty advance... Not to mention there tank doctrines too
at that time, the French army was one of the best in the world in terms of training and equipment, BUT we had a staff of fossilized old-timers from 14-18 who were totally outdated in terms of "modern" warfare and a doctrine for the use of armor that was totally obsolete.
Yes, but that's not enough to explain the fallout. ultimately it boils down to the hangover from World War I on the nations involved and the fact that the Nazi regime had singularity of purpose and total conviction, and total control could enforce their will the population. Britain and Franch were democracies, where parties had to provide services, couldn't act unilaterally and the ruling party was always fearful of upsetting the public, because It would lead to them Being replaced and losing power.
Ultimately, the Brits and the French wanted nothing to do with this War, and the politicians were cowards, not wanting to risk upsetting the public by saying they had to fight another world war (WW1 the worst war in British and French history in terms of military losses and disabilities) They were apathetic in planning - that's the only reason The Nazis got anywhere. If Nazis don't penetrate the Ardennes, This war would have been over within 2 years, with a Nazi loss, with Hitler in charge
Actually Germany was a true democracy! Over 95% of civilians supported the actions of their Government unlike our democracy!
Yeah only the 19th century
I so agree ...and might add those fossilized generals were outdated in the first war
They thought the spirits of Napoleon and the Grandee Armee would come and help them gain a glorious victory. They also thought that tanks couldn't get through the forest.
So brave of the Italians to declare war once Germany defeats France
They wanted a share in the spoils
did germany defeat france or did vichy france join forces to fight the allies
@@tom-ke7lb I think in Morocco Vichy French fought US soldiers....
Right
Italy has a history of that, they also like changing sides to whoever looks like they win=)
Combination of many things; any single one of them would probably not have proved fatal, but synergistically, it caused a quick collapse of France's ability to defend Metropolitan soil.
1) Much of the French command and control was utterly obsolete. General Gamelin didn't even have a radio operation and/or telephones; he had riders dispatch daily orders and receive reports from his field army commands. The French Air Force (L'Armee d'Air) had no coordination at all with their army, so what support it could give, until it was wiped out by the Luftwaffe, was often mis-directed and ineffectual. The Germans, OTOH, had learned during the Spanish Civil War, and refined methods during "Case White" (the conquest of Poland) of having Luftwaffe officers, many of whom were also paratroops or airborne anyway, as "FAC" (Forward Air Controllers), working with front-line battalions to direct air strikes. It was the same with their DLM and DCM armored units; their radios didn't even use the same frequency as those of the infantry divisions, and only a company commander of a French tank unit had a two-way radio, with only the larger Char B1s and Somua S--35s having a receiver...which used a ticker-tape printer instead of speakers, due to engine noise! The rest of the French armor used SEMAPHORE flags.
2) The Maginot Line actually succeeded, at least temporarily, in its original purpose, that is, to deter a German attack on the common border with France. It also had the effect of incentivizing Germany to violate the neutrality of the Low Countries. Of course, once the defensive lines of the Somme and the Aisne were penetrated in June of 1940, the supplies to the troops manning the Maginot Line were cut off, and it was attacked on June 14th 1940 by Army Group C, which broke through in three days. Over 150K French troops did hold out in the Maginot forts until the negotiated surrender date of June 25th, 1940, but they were fairly much doomed anyway.
3) Belgium was anxious to stay out of this second war, but was no more able to keep out its enormous German neighbor in 1940 than it had been in 1914. Its King and Army High Command refused to work out joint plans and exercises with the French, particularly in support of their "Dyle Plan", so its coordination with the Allies was spotty.
4) The Luftwaffe quickly gained air superiority over the French L'Armee D'Air, which hampered French troop movements. Furthermore, w/o significant resistance from Allied air forces, the Luftwaffe functioned in the role it was best suited for, as "Flying Artillery" for the Heer.
5) Although the French had MORE tanks than the Germans, and never mind what the BEF added, and overall, their vehicles had better armor and firepower, they were typically ineffective, although the French armor did bloody the Panzers in two succeeding battles in NE Belgium in May 1940, at Hannut and Gembloux. Aside from over half the French tanks being light, two-man models, which were about equal or slightly better than the German Panzer I and Panzer II light tanks, the heavier models were equipped with the ONE-man AXP4 turret, worked by the overburdened tank commander. Like the Renault and Hotchkiss light tanks, this turret had an unusual feature in that the commander's hatch was in the rear of the turret, and it had a built-in seat, so he'd ride looking over the turret! Needless to say, the tactical efficiency of French armor, along with most of them not having a radio, meant that in tank battles their efforts were often wasted. However, Captain Pierre Bilotte, son of a high-ranking general, commanding a Char B1 bis named "Eure", at Stonne on May 16, 1940, utterly devastated a German armored column, wiping out two Panzer IVs and eleven Panzer IIIs, while taking 140 hits from them and anti-tank guns and still was able to fight! This episode did, in a way, backfire spectacularly, as the post-battle analysis served to convince the Germans they needed to develop heavy tanks like the Char B1.
6) As many have covered, the "Dyle Plan" had a fatal flaw as executed: It left the French frontier next to the southeastern part of Belgium, i.e., the Ardennes, "defended" by the least-capable of the reservist "Series B" divisions. Gamelin et al didn't believe that Germany would send tanks through the winding roads of the Ardennes at all, believing that it'd take ten days to get through; it took the lead elements of the seven panzer divisions ten HOURS. The timing of the break-through at Sedan couldn't have been more unfortunate, and more an accident than any planning with foresight; the cream of the French forces, engaged in what were then massive tank battles at Hannut and Gembloux, were surprised by the bulk of the Panzers crashing through their rear, and, once they'd broken through, had a clear path to either Paris and/or the Channel Coast. Many also believed that the Germans would instead bypass Paris to the SOUTH, going down the Loire valley, the reverse of how Patton's Third Army did it four years hence, and reach the Channel at Cherbourg, bagging the entirety of the French Army and still forcing the BEF to evacuate.
7) The breakthrough reveal another fatal flaw of the French Army: lack of MANPOWER. What had driven things like the Maginot Line was the utter paucity of available French young men for military service in 1939-1940; what would have been the reserve had perished in the testicles of their would-be fathers at Sedan and Verdun in the Great War. Many of what Americans would later term "Retreads" had to be pressed into service, i.e., older WWI vets that were less fit, and, memories of officers and generals indifferent to them, were less inclined to fight to the death AGAIN.
There are still many myths that circulate: that the French were fighting the previous war (to some extent yes, but so did the British and the Germans likewise), that they relied on the Maginot Line solely to defend their frontier (untrue, there was no "Maginot-Line Mentality", indeed, Gamelin's desire to go on the offensive as soon as he felt he could is part of what led to France's crushing defeat), and, the worst, the "Cheese-eating Surrender Monkeys" trope. Ninety-Two thousand "Mort pour la Patrie" belies that notion, and, indeed, the French resistance along the Somme and Aisne rivers, during the final German offensive, "Operation Red", when their overall position was hopeless, belies any notions of French cowardice.
All of that for 8 likes. Lmao. I ain’t reading that.
As a French, I think we were defeated so quickly because of these two main reasons :
- Bad leadership : army was prepared as if it was quite the same war than in 1914-1918.
- Inadequate psychology : we declared war because of agreement with Great Britain and Poland but we were not ready and most of the population did not wanted it and were traumatised because of what happened in WW1 just 20 years before.
I think the second one was the most important to explain the surrender when it appeared that Germans were empowered us quite easily.
Defeated. Six weeks. It’s why the French built the Eiffel Tower. So Adolph could see the White Flag from his office window.
Couldn't even make a original joke, that's the Anglo-saxons for you
I mean, sometimes ''luck'' is a real thing. The story I heard was that originally the Germans were going to attack along the same axis they had in 1914.. and the British and French were waiting for them. But the actual plan, with dates, maps, troop deployments etc fell into the hands of the Allies when a German plane flew of course and was shot down, the French recovered the plans and were relieved they had guessed correctly. Hitler forced his Generals to come up with a new plan on the spot.. which is why they went through the Ardennes... which WAS essentially unpassable.. the Germans had traffic jams that lasted for days and if the Allied air forces had of spotted them, well it was game over for Hitler before the ball has even been kicked. But once they had gotten through, well they were behind the allied forward defences and Guderian, Rommel et al caused havoc.
The Allied Air forces spotted them but they thought it was a trap. Just like AH thought for a few days that the landings in Normandy were a trap and that the real landings were going to take place in the Pas-de-Calais.
All true, except for the wrinkle that the Germans did not KNOW the original plans had been captured. Hitler demanded they come up with a new plan because he correctly thought that the original plans were doing just what the opposition expected and would not decide the war. The fall of France took a lot of bad luck as well as bad management; there were plenty of other things (notably the driest May for years) where the Allies lost the toss of the dice in May 1940.
Yup.
But fun fact - An allied spy plan DID spot the German traffic jam on the other side of the Ardennes. It stretched for miles.
But it was dismissed as a diversion and the attack from Belgium was thought to be the main one. Now imagine if they british and french high had taken that seriously.....
Operation Barbarossa should have been delayed years. Stalin would have sold Germany the oil.
Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union using fuel from oil which they had been purchasing in record amounts from the the Soviet Union. All wars are banker's wars as the saying goes.
Soviets were planning to invade Germany, they struck first, just didn't focus on taking the oil fields and instead went after stalingrad, bad decision!
My brother bought a French military rifle. Great deal. Never fired and only dropped once.
Let's set the record straight.
This is how long the European countries invaded by the Nazis resisted:
Denmark: 6 Hours
Luxembourg: 1 day
Holland: 6 days
Yugoslavia: 11 days
Belgium: 18 days
Greece: 24 days
Poland: 27 days
France: 1 month and 12 days
Norway: 2 months and 1 day
It was too heavy for your so-called weak brother
My grandad was there when it all started and he had a very low opinion of the Frogs. He said that their equipment was ancient and that a lot of them were fifth columnists. His squadron left him behind and he eventually got out at St Nazaire after commandeering a tractor and traveling across northern France.
What did he think of the French rearguard at Dunkirk ? Or of the French during the Battle of Bir Hakeim ?
cowardly brits are one to talk quick to run as fast there cowardly legs would take them.........
@@phlm9038 Monty and Brooke were there if they had any command abilities it could have shown there. Actually jr officers like Lumsden established himself there and was noticed for his efforts and me ntioned in dispatches
M'y grand father french officer was KIA in 1940 ... for sure your father was not an héros !
@@bouchacourtthierry8506skill issue
Complete agree with this analysis French and British defense were not with the times. Germany used fast moving panzer divisions with dive bombers providing close air support. The blitzkrieg tactics used by Germany were just quick and superior
And it shouldn't have been such a surprise. The Axis had practiced in Spain during their civil war.
Let's set the record straight.
This is how long the European countries invaded by the Nazis resisted:
Denmark: 6 Hours
Luxembourg: 1 day
Holland: 6 days
Yugoslavia: 11 days
Belgium: 18 days
Greece: 24 days
Poland: 27 days
France: 1 month and 12 days
Norway: 2 months and 1 day
Britain always arms for peace time, right up until the start of war. They really dont like spending money on the army, until the last second.
Not really...
oh little villa the fact they got run off the continent and produce a schmuck like monty is condeming evidence
Yes the Sten gun would be a good example...
Not true, it had an overseas empire that it armed for. It was agressive in securing that empire best eg off the top of my head, the Boar War.
Britain survived only because of the English Channel. Germany had a weaker navy and they made the mistake of pulling US into the war. Otherwise Germany was much stronger in WW2.
Nice synopsis. I appreciate your efforts and admire the credits you provide for music and images, but many sentences have been lifted directly from elsewhere. It's good text - I can see why one might be tempted to use it as is - but it leaves you vulnerable to calls of plagiarism or even lawsuits. Maybe try to paraphrase a bit more?
Interesting enough, those French tanks had 2 forward gears and 5 reverse gears! 😂
USA rescued them 2X & they said Yankee go home !
Usa didn't do crap in WW1@@whoifwhat
@@TheFearsomePredator I know - but it pushed them over the edge since they were all tired & the US big & fresh !
I have strange love for Germany ❤. Don't know why
Because the women of Paris wanted men with balls for a change!!
The germans??? You mean those ridiculous skinny mens who used drugs(Pervitin) the whole war🤣🤣
for me its the leadership and the heart of the people to fight and defend the homeland.
Rule n 1 : Never assume that a forest is impenetrable or a death trap
Lion soldiers led by Donkeys
Germany had spent almost all the since the end of WWI gearing for another war. It had the advantage of trying out tactics and weapons in Spain '36-39. There is only so much that can be done while waiting for an attack. It also meant that France used their tanks as (slightly) mobile pill boxes. As with Britain most of the regular soldiers were 'low grade' - as opposed to the German army which was highly motivated, and fired up with Perrotin. What was more noticeable was the thought that Germany could take on the troop numbers from Russia and the US, as well as US production. The view of Britain and France was the Germany would not be so stupid this time. They were.
Nothing excuses the embarassing defeat of france and its allies in 1940
@@swagkachu3784 So easy to say from ur armchairs. What is embarrassing about that kind of defeat, men died, women and children dies, on all sides. Soldiers on all sides were brothers, sons, fathers and nourned. Nothing embarrassing about it. What is embarrassing is to think the way you write, to reduce such a tragedy to one of mindless, jingoistic pride. We are better than that.
Good video.
Thanks!
The Wehrmacht was also lucky. If the crossing of the Ardennes towards Sedan had been delayed by even one or two days, the story could have been very different.
7:11 these mfs are welding without eye stuff, i would simply go blind
Don't forget Dunkirk overnigt reembarkation it was also very very fast
Dear courageous english Friends thanks you for the first ww1
But in 1940 you weren't better than the others
The Blitzkrieg tactics of Germany against France in 1940 The Lightning War! K
Logic answer: 🐸 can't shoot back
And did anyone Notice how the French decided at the last minute to bomb (their former ally) Libya when Ghaddafi was on his last leg?
Nobody cares.
A retired french general told me why france and uk were crushed so quicly .. French/Uk commands did not understand the importance of the engine.. simple like that
Your general should've told you that no one remembers that the British fought in that war.
@@thierrydesuinteresting .. are we talking about ww2 or what ? So the british were tourist ?
@@gianpaolo1964 Yes they were. To sum up WWII: The Germans move forward. The Brits leave their positions and run (in the opposite direction). The French cover them. The French are defeated. The French are called cowards. The Brits are called heroes.
@thierrydesu the french fries surrendered 😂😂 put that in there as well, even in 2024 the French fries are acting like cowards and the war isn't even at their doorstep yet.
@@Yuaretrash Still, tell me about the Brits who didn't fight? And avoid smileys not to look stupid.
Le refus d'engager la RAF pendant la bataille de France et le refus des Britanniques d:envisager une action en tenaille sur la percée allemande vers la mer ,comme leur décision unilatérale d'abandonner le champ de bataille ont grandement contribué à la defaite française, ce qu:ils ont tendance à oublier. De plus leur corps expéditionnaire était de taille réduite. Il ne faut pas falsifier mes faits. Cela n:enlève en rien 'otre reconnaissance du courage et de la contribution décisive du peuple anglais à 'notre libération.
Power on paper but clueless defeatist leadership. British and French had chance to properly prepare and mobilise but they didn't. Germany fought WW2 tactics, British and French WW1. Germans were professional British and French not. Feel really sorrow for those soldiers so let down by their leaders. Singapore was another strategic catastrophe and all those soldiers surrendered by a failed leadership to a wicked opponent.
The French know how to dance and cook well.
But none of them are warriors.
French intelligence missed Russia's attack on Ukraine in 2022. Then the French intelligence chief retired because he screwed up everything 😞👎☹️
You think the French lost to the Germans? lol, you should see how bad they lost after they won.
Neither allied airforce had any tactical ground troop support tactics, training or equipment while the Luftwaffe was created to assist the ground army with accurate dive and level bombers plus strafers. Both allied airforces were wedded to the Douhet destroy the enemy's industries and cities which neither could manage with the few inferior planes and bombs they had.
it was defeated so quickly because it became a hedonistic country, while germany becauce a country that lost its movement freedom
The short answer is to blame Stalin for his command cadres repressions!
The Germans just wanted it more😅
And of course, not a word about Pervitin use by german spearheads, not a word of UK expeditionnary force retreating without a fight or a word to its allies... And not a clue about demographics that were so much in the benefit of Germany. A typical anglo-saxon point of view.
KUDOS TO YOU FOR THIS FAIR ASSESMENT!
A typical arrogant and ignorant French assessment.
1) Retreated without a fight? So says someone who makes comments on history videos without studying history. Maybe you haven't heard of Arras? The British mounted many counterattacks against the Germans, most of which failed due to lack of cooperation from the French.
2) Didn't tell anyone they were leaving? Then explain why 30% of the troops evacuated at Dunkirk were French army, while there were British troops that stayed and fought with the French rear guard and sat out the war in POW camps.
@@mikearmstrong8483 typical english arrogance.
At Arras, it’s the tanks of the 3rd DLM that stopped Rommel, and not your machine guns Matildas. And remember that english troops abandonned the battle to be evacuated at Dunkerque.
And no, you did not warn allied troops you left. Even Churchill recognized it !
And both french and english troops lost each about 40.000 prisoners, but where BEF suffered 3.500 dead, french army lost 18.000 dead.
@@dargaard93
The French army lost 18,000 dead? They fucking well should have; they were defending their own country! Pretty pathetic for a country whose population was in the millions to surrender after losing 18,000. Whereas the British lost thousands of lives defending what was NOT their own country. Typical French arrogance; they expect somebody else to die for them rather than sacrifice for their own country.
And you still have provided NO answer; if the British told nobody they were leaving, then why were 30% of the evacuated troops at Dunkirk French?
And again, study history before commenting; the British tanks at Arras were Mathilda IIs, cannon armed and superior to German tanks. While the French who said they would provide a brigade for the attack barely mustered a single battalion of infantry and a company of tanks.
@@dargaard93 What do you mean the British didn't fight? Err are you forgetting the soldiers of the 2nd Battalion, the Royal Norfolk Regiment who defended a farmhouse for a week against an attack by the Waffen SS in the village of Le Paradis? Or the 51st Highlander division at Saint-Valéry?
No radio commo on the French part vs 2 way radios down to the companies, tanks and planes on the German side
I am not afraid of an army of lions led by a sheep. I am afraid of an army of sheep led by a lion.
- Alexander the Great
Adolf Hitler declared that the French are, after the Germans, “the best soldiers in all of Europe”.
He was wrong about the German soldiers.
@@thierrydesu Napolean said when in doubt, attack. 🤔must have gotten lost in the translation, attack, run like a dog??
@@davidneumann5175 You are describing the Brits.
Bla bla bla is better to say,than theirs incompetence
Macron was not born then, otherwise it would be even
The alis got shwere punked .
I enjoyed that thankyou. Food for thought. War is never glorious, defeat is never embarrasing as one said below. People die, those people are mourned. The French were not stupid, nor cowards as some are suggesting below. The Germans not destined to win, even if the USA and USSR had not enetered the war. What a ridiculous propostion. As one of these casts shows germany's armed forces were not technologically or numerically supercharged or even superior to even the UK or France on their own. Hitler & his Nazi Party took a huge gamble, intially were lucky and as time progressed the logic of their inferior positon coud not be overcome by luck. Good.
I watched this to see if the description of the intitial success of Germany in this part of WW2 would bring out the hypothesis aired in the book, Drugs In The 3rd Reich. Only one comment has alluded to that and that comment understated the role of drugs in this initial success. As one commenter wrote Hitler halted the attacks on Dunkirk for a good reason, not to over extend the supply lines. He had 1st hand experience of what happens when this occurs when it happened to the germans in WW1. His units were totally out of control, no one knew where they were and how to supply them as they were all off their faces on a LSD type drug. Chirchill thought the germans could not get through the Ardennes, nor the French, this drug got them through. By thew time of Dunkirk the Germans were fighting with no mental reserves, they had been awake for I think 10 days straight. No one thought a campaign would be fought on this basis.
This is why the allkies could not work out the german plan, they didn't have one after the intial moves, they were on drugs going nuts and lucky.
This was not mentioned in the cast. The book is a great read. The drugs really worked against germany later in the war. Sorry cant remember the author.
War superiority is always who has the most advanced technology. Romans had ships. The USA had the atom bomb. The Germans rolled right over France using tanks outfitted like cars. The French were still thinking it was 1916.
The "funny" thing, if you can call it funny, is the allies found a copy of de Gaulle's book "The army of the future" with handwritten annotations from Hitler when they arrived in Berchtesgaden.
It’s not the technology but the blitzkrieg tactic that won the war for Germany. France and Britain had similar level of tech as Germany.
Now France goes to Ukraine. To win the War this Time.😅
Russian propaganda again.
Er, because they are French. They are self-proclaimed lovers, not fighters.
You should be a reader....
@@tszirmay I have been reading for 70 years mate.
@@johnadams-wp2yb as a military historian, mate ?
The French still can't whip butter lol
As some US firms at this time supported nazi regime ? USA did as usual, they did not care until someone shitted in their pants...
To combat malnutrition and obesity, the French passed a law several years ago banning snack foods in public vending machines.
I guess they finally found someone they could beat:
Little Debbie!
@@mikearmstrong8483 LOL, 😂
The French should be grateful to the Canadians, British and the US for liberating their cowardly country.
Atleast they fought bravely and like lions till the end causing a lot of damage to the Wehrmacht which was a great enemy. USA has been defeated by peasants with ak47 after 20 years and fled abandoning all their materials like brits did at dunkirk knowing they have the first military power in the world.
USA has nothing to brag about LOL
Classified ad- "For sale- Vintage WW2 French rifle. EXCELLENT condition! Never fired, dropped once."
Nice stolen joke
People re-tell jokes all the time! It's only stolen if you claim you coined a joke that you didn't.@@SlashHarkenUltra
The french fought more than the british
Looking for french comment here .....
Denmark defeated in 1 day.
The Netherlands defeated in 4 days.
Belgium defeated in 18 days.
UK evacuated after 18 days.
Poland defeated in 36 days
France defeated in 46 days.
Everyone : Why was France defeated so quickly ? LOL !
@@phlm9038 Thank God for the English Channel....
Because it's france
That didn't stop the French army from marching in Berlin in 45
why did the english run away so fast was it planned ?
I have no knowledge about a subject, guess what I'll do: make a TH-cam video on that subject!!
Weak and incompetent leadership can do more harm than the actual enemy.
True and German soldiers show that in Eastern-Front when Hitler made all the orders.
Exactly how American leaders are! Weak…stupid..selfish fools willing to sell out to the highest bidders!….
To be fair the Germans did less damage to France than the British. France had a good chance to come out of WWII with little lost had they not signed that agreement with the British to not seek peace independently.
@@phillipp5538 Now that is a steaming pile of horse shit
The French suffer 100.000 deaths in only 4 weeks. Not even in WW1 any army endured such ammount of dead in such short time.
It was realy tragic to The French army.
At the beginning of WW1 the French suffered almost 30,000 deaths in one day.
@@rayquaza1245 27.000 thousand,Battle of the frontiers. And the battle lasted for 2 months.
In August the French suffered in total 75.000 deaths. August/ September
In total the French had suffered 329.000 casualities,during August and September 1914.
Russia
Holy fuk
Germany was also loosing far more men per day in 1940 at rates of Which it couldn't sustain as acknowledged by Hitler when taped in Finland in 1942 . Nevertheless as it was concluded with large territorial gains and the lands pacified save minor insurrection it was a good win for them
France: Do i look like a joke to you?
Germany: Pretty much!
Really ?
th-cam.com/video/lKr9WBJBW44/w-d-xo.html
Lol France still won the war alongside its allies, so the joke is on germany I think, getting beaten by a nation that has surrendered is quite something 😂.
@@Alhmaleonn nope,,u lose shut up😂
@@Alhmaleonn Counting them in as a victor was a huge stretch and they weren't considered equal.
@@Alhmaleonn the only reason they were counted is because of the alliance. Consolation prize so to say.
not just the french but also the BRITISH EXPEDITIONARY FORCE..
The UK was never fully occupied at any point in WW2. The French failed to fight off a homeland invasion which is completely different from the British losing a couple of major battles in the early part of the war. I don’t think the “BRITISH EXPEDITIONARY FORCE” losing is a fair comparison to what happened in France. France quite literally rolled over in WW2.
@@cskelly3783 right you are mate. The uk wisely ran and cowered in the subway tunnels and prayed for AMERICA to save their sorry inbred tea drinking asses. France stood alone. England groveld. Now drink your tea and eat your spotted dick. AMERICA is here to protect you.
@@cskelly3783 the channel islands were surrendered without a shot
Skelly ain't British. But for us Skelly you wouldn't be posting codswallop on here.
The Britsh left 80% of there military hardware on the beach there - a staggering amount - they were there in force
RAF and French air forces were good , but often lacked in cooperation with field troops.
Neither allied airforce had any tactical ground troop support tactics, training or equipment while the Luftwaffe was created to assist the army.
RAF withdrew much of their air force that they had committed to the French campaign to defend Britain.
Both of them were shit until the Battle of Britain, the hell are you talking about?
@@tackywhale5664 The battle for France had cost the Luftwaffe 28% of its front line strength, some 1,428 aircraft destroyed (1,129 to enemy action, 299 in accidents).
now Russia has begin the snails-war against Ukraine and we all will pay for it🥴
Very good pointing out that the French and British had the greater military force but lacked a plan so they basically refought WWI. The Germans used a very different approach. You neglected to mention that Britain and France actually declared war on Germany. That is what precipitated the invasion. Hitler wanted war but he wanted it in 1945.
Germany invaded Poland because Poland was killing German civilians inside Poland. Then France and Britain declared war on the Germans. Makes sense to me the allied forces are the villains in the story.
@@eduardomaldonado1647 all true. A friend of mine had a book that documented the torture and murder of ethnic Germans by poles. Unfortunately the book was in German so I couldn't read it but the estimate was as high as 54,ooo Germans were killed. They were never sure what entity was actually responsible. The Germans had reasonable demands, access to Danzig via a rail line across former German territory. Britain guaranteed Polish sovereignty knowing they could do to back up the promise. When Poland was invaded they declared war on Germany and gave Russia a pass. The reason they wanted war was because Hitler ditched the Federal Reserve style banking system they were saddled with in favor of sovereign control of their currency.
@@eduardomaldonado1647 Oh please spare us your lame Nazi BS. The Nazis murdered Poles and Jews by the millions
I've heard it had a lot to do with tactics and the fact that german tanks all had radios and so could really coordinate all of their attacks.
@@jeffk464 The French tanks had 1 man turrets where the commander had to load and fire the gun too while Germans had 3 men to do the same jobs so the commander can concentrate on just running the tank
When the military planners of France said the Ardennes was impassible to armor perhaps they were thinking CharB1s. Those slow behemoths would have gotten stuck for sure! Light to medium panzers didn’t share that problem.
No. B1s can easily go through rough terrain, even Ardennes, as it has been tried in 1947. It's just the IDEA that prevailed but noone really tried it.
@@dargaard93 Another video about France's "Six Week War" revealed TWO weak areas on the Char B1. There's a DOOR on the right side and a RADIATOR on the left side. A German Anti-Tank gun commander found out about the latter in combat and knocked out at least one or two of three in combat. The former was commented upon it getting blown open by a German A-T round by a veteran French tank driver/gunner, which was mind-blowing!
There was a massive German traffic jam in the Ardennes early on which the allies failed to bomb.
@@alexbowman7582 The french High Command ignored even recon pics from german panzers. They knew but chose to ignore. Blind, deaf and stupid.
The French should have been grateful to the Canadians, British and the US for liberating their cowardly country.
Incorect ! France ,Belgium ,Holland and british expeditionary force defeated in 6 weeks! 😂
The Netherlands surrendered in less than four days; Belgium after just 14 days. Some French units were still fighting even after the armistice with Germany had been signed, and only laid down their arms when higher ranking French generals ordered them to do so. The BEF withdrew from France, yes; though defeated, the vast majority of the British soldiers lived to fight "another day" against Nazi Germany.
Don't forget Luxembourg ;-)
@@marcmonnerat4850 - the Grand Duchy was overrun on May 10th.
War is a matter of organisation and recognizing every chance and challenge and it doesn't just only start when a war begins.
Simple.The Brits and the French wanted nothing to do with this war, so they dragged their feet and were underprepared compared To a Nazi elite with singular focus and having mobilised with intention for at least another couple of years. By comparison.
Ultimately,the French army was still pretty competitive on paper, so the Ultimate problem was that the French command were apathetic and made the catastrophic error that advancement in technology since the First World War made The Ardennes " very penetrable"
*This crazy really… The Brits and French would have defeated the Nazis if they didn't make this silly error and how different the world would look today!
Maginot Line was... "Imagine, no line"
Maginot Line do his job very well. The real problem is explained in the video
Ha ha ha ha....
Nope@@ziib9883
The French and British tanks, were never a match for an 88mm Flak 36. Then again, this weapon was destroying JS2 tanks in the final days.
Very few 88s in France. Rommel grabbed a bunch and used them to great advantage. However, if the French had:
1. Unity of command with aggressive intent.
2. Radios
3. Units trained for speed with more trucks.
4. More aggressive training
5. Some miracle of countering German air superiority
They then could have counter-attacked.
France sought to fight WW2 using WW1 tactics; Germany sought to fight WW2 by WW2 tactics.
And all the world was using WWI tactics
The difference between a winner and a looser is the looser is more progressive than the winner hence the next encounter the hegemon cannot rely on the ways which worked then working again. Past performance is no guarantee of future success.
Not really true. May 1940 and may 1941 (Barbarossa) were the only times in WW2 where Guderian's vision came to fruition, and it took an unusual combination of circumstances for that to happen. In the rest of the war in Europe successful offensives on both sides were much closer in character to the Hundred Days one of 1918 than to the Ardennes one of May 1940. Motorised logistics, sure, but fewer light tanks and CAS and far more artillery and deep strike.
was there a huge difference though? 20 years between them what really changed?
France was very poor and couldn't afford a ww2 army. France had to rebuild from ww1 Germany did not, this meant Germany was much richer than France in 1940. Also Germany was twice as big 80 million to 40 million.
Historic info. Say no to war
there were too many generals left-over from ww1.
Albert Speer said that Hitler told him he had high opinion of French soldiers in WW1, but a low opinion of French leadership. There are probably a number of French that would agree with Hitler on that. When I look at any number of countries that fought the Germans early on, the French probably did the best. The Russians had more men to lose, and more territory to retreat in. The British did well against the Italians, but poorly against the Germans early on. In the Desert, it was often Australian and New Zealanders that did well. Taking France cost the Germans well over 150,000 casualties. This did not happen with the French being pushovers. How far had the Germans gone in the same amount of time in Russia?
More Casualties at Pavlovs house, than in all of France
@@fintanmccann1128 🤣🤣🤣🤣
The polish killed about the same number of Germans as the French did.. even while being invaded from the east by the soviets and having far inferior tech.
@@brendan4917 The figures I have seen for Poland was 16,000 dead/missing, 34,000 wounded. In France the figures I saw were 45,000 dead/missing, 110,00 wounded. As far as the Russians invading Poland in the east, I have often wondered if they Russians had not attacked how long could the Poles have lasted?
@@fintanmccann1128 General Chuikov, you have had too much Vodka!
Generals & military planners fighting the last war PLUS defense & defense planning by minimum budget committee.
Germany invaded Poland on September 1, not September 3.
Command and control!! The allies' communications were tuned to a battlefield moving at walking speed. The Germans were moving at 15-20 miles an hour. The orders of the allies never arrived in time.
The two French army leaders didn’t like each other and wouldn’t communicate. One third of the French sat in the Maginot, one third wouldn’t fight and one third fought like lions eventually saving the British expeditionary force.
Im surprised that France collapsed in 6 weeks, i thought it was 6 hours😂.
You are so funny.
From what country with a greatest military history than France are you btw?
Let's set the record straight.
This is how long the European countries invaded by the Nazis resisted:
Denmark: 6 Hours
Luxembourg: 1 day
Holland: 6 days
Yugoslavia: 11 days
Belgium: 18 days
Greece: 24 days
Poland: 27 days
France: 1 month and 12 days
Norway: 2 months and 1 day
@@jorgeteixeira1922 France is silver medalist.
More like 6 seconds 😂
The French get a bad rap for failing to fend off the Germans, but it's undeserved. Up until that point France was a major world power and all throughout history had been a feared military force. After WWI it was unthinkable that Germany would be able to launch a major offensive again. But when they did, they did so with modern tactics and industrial tech. They caught all of Europe with their pants down, not just the French. Even the British probably would have eventually fallen had it not been for American and (arguably moreso) Soviet intervention. Stopping Germany and the other Axis powers really took a worldwide effort and significant human cost.
Without the English Channel the British would have fallen earlier.
@phlm9038 but they didn't fall at all
@@hugh8090 Because they could evacuate back to UK.
I'm not even denying that. Your words were " fallen earlier" which just didn't make sense. That's all. And, more to the point, they returned and played a significant role in the liberation of France.
@@hugh8090 I know that they played a significant role in the liberation of France. I should have said "fallen as well" (my mistake).
How many French troops does it take to defend Paris? They dont know they have never done it.
In Dunkerque, the British fight ...until the last French soldier.
A third of those evacuated from Dunkirk were French. You also fail to mention that in the early stages of the German invasion, the brits were advancing to engage Germans in sectors that were meant to be held by the French. The brits met the French units running away from the very sectors they were supposed to be defending.
Don't expect someone else to defend your country when you can't be bothered to do it yourself.
@@sanya7187 "The brits met the French units running away from the very sectors they were supposed to be defending."
You should read a detailed book about the battle of Dunkirk and you will be surprised. There were witnesses who saw some Brits running away as well.
"England will fight to the last Frenchman" : That was a German propaganda, a sentence among so many other things I won't enumerate because you won't like it.
You 🤡
That pretty much all 😂 britishs did during that war.
@@alan.imangue All the French did was Surrender. 😂😂😂😂😂😂
France, when 100k soldiers die : I surrender 🏳🏳
Soviet Union, when 27 million people die : Not a step back! 🗿🗿
On the 27 million Soviets killed, how many were killed by the Soviet authorities?
@@thierrydesuвсе 27 миллионов было зверски убито нацистскими оккупантами
@@begisss Combien n'ont eu que le choix entre les balles du NKVD et les balles des Allemands ? Arrêtez de dire n'importe quoi.
@@thierrydesuто есть ты хочешь сказать, что советские люди встали на защиту своей страны не потому, что на нее напали враги, а потому что их заставило НКВД? Интересная логика
You forgot that they had 100k dead and 200k injured in less than a month and they had 40million population while the soviets got those 27m casualties in 3years while having almodt 300m population
Excited about Frances new combat tank, 6 gears 1 neutral and 5 reverse gears
Germany never defeated Britain.
The British ran away before they could finish the BEF off. The British didn't surrender, the English channel saved them, and the fact Hitler thought he could persuade them to join forces with them and conquer the world . Churchill rejected that idea
USA bailed them out
@@damianglenn2565 If anything, Russia bailed them out. Russia did the majority of the work in Europe, not USA. USA did the majority of the work in Japan.
@@damianglenn2565Germany declared war on the US
Dunkirk 😅😅😅
Napoleon: nous allons lutter à la mort.
France 1940: yeah, no.
Napoleonic wars 19 the century : 1 100 000 french soldiers dead. , WW1 : 6 milion, soldiers and citizens . 1940: it's time to stop the genocide.
😂😂😂
Add 2024
A better translation for "case yellow" is operation yellow
The reason is because they have a weak military; they only show as strong ONLY in Africa🤣🤣🤣
The usual African troll.
I have a WW2 French military rifle for sale, only been dropped once.
Remember pavlovs house lasted longer than the whole goddamn france
And then after five years of practically staying out of the fighting, the French for some reason got their occupational zone of Germany placing themself toe-to-toe with the three countries that really won the war!? Weren't they ashamed at all?
@@matovicmmilanthey literally got the U.S to resupply them to attack Indochina by crying
Because UK wanted a buffer to the USSR incase the soldiers attacked. The UK feared the USA would leave and be isolationist like after ww1.
Pavlov's house was never conquered or occupied by the same Germans from the Sixth Army that took over France in 45 days.
Blud you compare a random house inside of the biggest country ever to a whole country
Only a fraction of German forces were mechanized units, but their strategy to concentrate those in a specific area is the difference maker.
Too busy eating quiche and cheese. What an embarrassment we should have just left Europe to Germany. Same goes for Ukraine let Europe handle it leave North America out of it.
You american??? Shouldn't be talking, the French shouldn't helped you then in your independence
A complete and utter defeat that to this day has not been explained to me. Even not with this list of maybes
French and britain did not win anything🤣😅🤣😅
The United Kingdom did win the battle of Britain which was the first major reverse of the war. Thanking you.
Though I’ve gone over this campaign many times, I sill learned a few new things.
one factor is the attitude of french generals. They were not flexible or can not improvised planning on the spot. Much more their highest general at that time was arrogant that he does not heed suggestion. He did not have a reserve force because he was too assured that the Germans will not go through the low land countries. Until it is too late and he has no back up force to contain the germans coming from the low countries.
They were more interested in their wine and brandy for lunch. They often spent 2 hours eating lunch. Also, their troops didn’t want to obey orders and many were pro communists, supporting Stalin and not France.
Because they could find enough white flags quickly?
Trying to defend your country with a cavalry against Panzer’s? Insane!
French Tank transmissions have 1 forward gear and 6 reverse!
italian tank has a cannon in the front and back
German tank has broken transmission
Get to learn how to become a clown
Manstein and Gerhard Heinrici wrre jighly talented German Officers. L, alongside Erwin Rommel.
There was no Axis air superiority...The French air force was so disorganized, that when France surendered, they had 1,700 plains that had never even taken off.
French Armee de l'Air veterans mentioned that the Luftwaffe suffered big losses during the Battle of France, which delayed the start of the Battle of Britain.
Not just inadequate, but no coordinate with field troops.
The French should have been grateful to the Canadians, British and the US for liberating their cowardly country.
even tanks....the germans just reuse the French tanks in other operation
@@Petal4822 nation that won more battles then all mentioned is cowardly....they have been at war more then any other nation cowardly nations don't do that win or lose.
French are lovers , not warriors 😂😂😂😂😂
You are a clown , not a human 😂😂😂😂😂
That's why they have the most military victories😂😂😂 learn history before making such a stupid comment lil kiddo
The losses the French suffered in WWI were generational losses all because the leadership and generals had "No Regard" for their soldiers lives. Their strategy was little more than Napoleonic charges into machine gun fire.... The French Maginot Line in WWII was poorly manned, completely developed and a fixed object that was easily overrun by planned movement in your strategy.(Which the French knew/ know not). The French leadership and generals of WWII sold their people and country down the river without an effort or thought.
The Germans had an inferior army, inferior in numbers, inferior in quality, but superior strategy and tactics. The Manstein Plan involved deception, surprise and speed…. Bewegungskrieg. With limited forces, the Germans concentrated their limited armored forces at Ardennes Schwerpunkt. Germany had fuel and ammo for only a few weeks of combat. The Battle of France was won in 3 days and 3 night by an army fueled by Methamphetamine once they crossed the river Meuse and headed for the coast.
Inferior in quality!!!! What a joke
"Inferior in quality" , lol the french used horses to advance quickly they had almost no armored vehicules their tanks had no radio for communication and their Guns and attillery were outdated
All you said is literally the other way around of true history
Panzer 2 was a machine gun carrier. Panzer 37 mm peashooter cannon, thin armor. Few short barrel Panzer 4. Most German army was on foot or horses. Limited fuel and ammo.
French had the heavy CharB. Yes, communication was weak with Allies. Huge armies. Germany with speed, concentration of forces at decisive point… cut lines of communication. Before they ran out of oil and ammo.
Not possible against USSR.
France was not the most powerful army at the time.
No, not in 1939. It was in 1933. In the meanwhile they had to reduce their army to the same level as the German army in the name of "appeasement".