What if Germany liberated Poland after keeping Danzig and it's earlier boundaries?

[Acheron]

I wonder at times if the French high command of 1940 would also have failed at 1914. In the later case, they were also caught rather red-handed, but they managed to cobble together a blocking formation that stopped the German advance. In 1940 on the other hand, one thing Marc Bloch complained about was declaring many a city an opine city and forego any resistance out of fear of the city getting damaged at the expense of the nation at large.

 

[bz249]

I wonder at times if the French high command of 1940 would also have failed at 1914. In the later case, they were also caught rather red-handed, but they managed to cobble together a blocking formation that stopped the German advance. In 1940 on the other hand, one thing Marc Bloch complained about was declaring many a city an opine city and forego any resistance out of fear of the city getting damaged at the expense of the nation at large.

No, because neither in 1870 nor in 1914 could Germany mobilize and supply enough men which required a fast enough destruction of the French/Allied armies.

 

[Fulmen]

My knowledge of tank systems stops around 1950, but I didn't think a 30 mm bushmaster could penetrate a modern MBT.

My memory's a bit hazy, but I think depending on where it hits and from at what range, it's possible. And even if you don't have an angle on the rear of the tank, you can still screw with its optics with a 30mm.

I remember when I served in the Finnish Army, one of the CV9030 commanders in my unit flanked a group of Leopard 2A4s during war games and "destroyed" them. This was with lasers and prisms of course, but I would assume that means it's possible with live ammunition. The guy got a promotion for it too.

 

[pithorr]

I don't know. We would have endless Somua vs. Pz III threads i say this is bullet well dodged.


Brzeczyszczykiewicz much?

Typing on a smartphone may be a bit troubledome. <- Look here for instance.
BTW: to ty, TEN Maur?

My impression has been that French high command failed pretty badly by simply not keeping any noteworthy reserves which could be employed against breakthrough. They actually had previously an army in reserve, but at some point Gamelin decided to commit it to Netherlands leaving him empty handed then critical moment arrived.

But the French actually tried to establish several points of defence against German Panzer spearheads. The problem was they were every time too late due to unbelieveble pace of German advance. But if Guderian listened to the OKW, waited for some infantry to secure his flanks, etc., maybe they would eventually have succeeded to stop the Germans...

 

[olm]

But the French actually tried to establish several points of defence against German Panzer spearheads. The problem was they were every time too late due to unbelieveble pace of German advance. But if Guderian listened to the OKW, waited for some infantry to secure his flanks, etc., maybe they would eventually have succeeded to stop the Germans...

Well, one thing is failing to set up defence in time to stop breakthrough in first place, other is to not having significant reserves to hit back at flanks of extended German bulge.

 

[Grandpa Maur]

Typing on a smartphone may be a bit troubledome. <- Look here for instance.
BTW: to ty, TEN Maur?

Yeah, only older and uglier!

 

[Avernite]

I would note the French weren't the only ones who got their behinds kicked by the Germans; the Dutch position was plenty strong in Fortress Holland except for the failure to blow the Moerdijk bridges (ensuring all the reserves for the Grebbeberg were also missing when the Germans attacked there), the Belgians got pwned at Eben-Emael, and of course later in Africa Rommel blew the British all the way back to El Alamein.

To me the conclusion is that, while the French high command surely had learning to do, it wasn't some vastly stupid defence; they didn't only make mistakes, the Germans also did a lot of things right - consistently. And if one side is doing all the right things and the other lots of mistakes, any situation rapidly goes pear-shaped.

 

[Stuckenschmidt]

I don`t visit the history forum often. The title of this thread is one of the reasons why.

Germany "liberates" Poland. Wow.

 

[pithorr]

Yeah, only older and uglier!

Come on, we're like wine

I don`t visit the history forum often. The title of this thread is one of the reasons why.

Germany "liberates" Poland. Wow.

Hehe, Stucki. It might be useful to liberate Poland to invade it again. And again and again. Who could you have to invade otherwise?

 

[ThaHoward]

I don`t visit the history forum often. The title of this thread is one of the reasons why.

Germany "liberates" Poland. Wow.

To be fair it was originally a HOI4 thread. I assume they mean "liberate" through game mechanics.

 

[Kovax]

I don`t visit the history forum often. The title of this thread is one of the reasons why.

Germany "liberates" Poland. Wow.

I took it as meaning "Releases" part of it as a free state or puppet, rather than "Liberates", a rather poor choice of words. If that's originally from a discussion on HOI4 game mechanics, it makes a lot more sense. After Hitler's previous breaches and utter contempt for his own signed treaties and sworn statements, nobody was going to rest until he was out of power. There is no sense in negotiating with someone who has clearly been negotiating in bad faith all along.

If Hitler were assassinated or overthrown and exiled by his own military, then the Allies MIGHT have been willing to consider some kind of truce, but I still don't see any chance of Germany keeping more than a tiny fraction of what was taken up to that point; possibly Danzig and the more heavily German pieces of the Sudetenland at most.

 

[kettyo]

Yes, of course, but such thinking was justified just after Sedan already. If such fears prevailed, German success would never have been such spectacular, if even had been any success at all..

That's correct. The Ardennes offensive was a desperate plan to give some minimal chance of winning in a seemingly lost cause for Germany. The Germans considered it's success a miracle too.

 

[Grandpa Maur]

Come on, we're like wine

Chyba Jabol

Sorry, I'm even more grumpy lately than usual....

 

[Grandpa Maur]

I took it as meaning "Releases" part of it as a free state or puppet, rather than "Liberates", a rather poor choice of words. If that's originally from a discussion on HOI4 game mechanics, it makes a lot more sense. After Hitler's previous breaches and utter contempt for his own signed treaties and sworn statements, nobody was going to rest until he was out of power. There is no sense in negotiating with someone who has clearly been negotiating in bad faith all along.

If Hitler were assassinated or overthrown and exiled by his own military, then the Allies MIGHT have been willing to consider some kind of truce, but I still don't see any chance of Germany keeping more than a tiny fraction of what was taken up to that point; possibly Danzig and the more heavily German pieces of the Sudetenland at most.

The first 3-4 pages of this thread are hilarious. I'd expect such discussion to happen in 100-200 years, after collective memory fades, but i think i underestimated humanity abilities.

 

[Henry IX]

People often forget that out of the three main German spearheads, Reinhardt was stopped cold by the French, Rommel had to personally direct fire to break through, and only Guderian had a smooth initial breakthrough, but he outran his supply lines in doing so and got extremely lucky he wasn't caught when his vehicles were out of fuel. Rommel followed up his breakthrough with a night advance cross-country, something the Allies didn't even risk late war if they could help it, and caught the French off-guard along the way as they were preparing several defensive positions.

So the French clearly knew what was going on, were preparing defense in depth, but were out-generaled and defeated in large part through sheer audacity by Rommel. That's not incompetent, that's just being beaten.

While I will agree on the critical role of a handful of German generals on the collapse of France the French were deeply incompetent. After the breakthrough at Sedan the French attempted to mount a counter-attack against the breakthrough. It took them 48hrs to mount a counter-attack at the battalion level against an operational level breakthrough by an entire army group. To reiterate - after 2 days of planning the French attempted to stop a an army group with a counter-attack consisting of a few companies. The French had the X corps in reserve and the XXI corps in the area as well with almost 300 tanks between them, so the idea that they had no local reserves is not true, they just totally failed to get them into action in a timely and effective manner.

 

[hkrommel]

While I will agree on the critical role of a handful of German generals on the collapse of France the French were deeply incompetent. After the breakthrough at Sedan the French attempted to mount a counter-attack against the breakthrough. It took them 48hrs to mount a counter-attack at the battalion level against an operational level breakthrough by an entire army group. To reiterate - after 2 days of planning the French attempted to stop a an army group with a counter-attack consisting of a few companies. The French had the X corps in reserve and the XXI corps in the area as well with almost 300 tanks between them, so the idea that they had no local reserves is not true, they just totally failed to get them into action in a timely and effective manner.

It wasn’t quite that simple either. The original plan was to defend in depth against the breakthrough while getting those reserves you mention in place for a counterattack. Rommel’s nighttime advance simply overran large amounts of forces as they were strung out on the road and digging prepared positions. The reserves were, after that, completely out of position so the French threw that counterattack in to delay the Germans.

That’s actually not a bad strategy, especially when you realize that’s *exactly* what Zhukov did to blunt the German spearhead during Typhoon. They can’t advance very far if you’re counterattacking piecemeal to delay them. They have to stop and deal with mere companies or battalions, and this way you can delay an army with a company.

The problem is that the French had neither the space nor forces the Soviets had, and they failed to get those formations you mentioned into position for a counterattack. In those terms, I’m again not too keen on calling it incompetence. Not every failure is incompetence.

 

[Ming]

I like to conceptualized the battle of France as a Judo match.

Once the Germans successfully 'off balanced' the French by feinting through the Low Countries but then powering through the Ardennes the match was essentially over.

It didn't matter how long it took for France to physically 'fall down' there was no way to recover enough from having their legs splayed out while the Germans have a choke hold and the weight of their entire body pressing down.

The desperate scrabbling afterwards that gets no results looks like incompetence, (and there are very real failures to criticize) but barring another mistake by the Germans as large as that of the initial French one, even perfect play is going to get similar results with perhaps a bit more blood and shouting.


Contrast that with the Soviets who got the same treatment but had enough space in the ring to fall backward and roll away before getting pinned.

 

[Acheron]

Some things I am wondering right now: apart from Germany's northern faint against the Netherlands, is it true that they convinced the French of an impending offensive in the south against the Maginot-Line, tying down valuable troops there?
According to wikipedia, both sides mustered 3,3 million soldiers for the battle of France. Yet the combined French and British population base was larger than Germany's, no? Why didn't this translate into numerical superiority in the theater of war? What were the respective numbers in 1914, on the start of WWI?

 

[Gurkhal]

Here's a bit of a different take on the thread's titlel, as the discussion seems to have moved away from it.

What if the Nazis had not doubled down on their ideas about Slavic sub-humans and instead tried a system of sympathic reactionary or fascist puppet states, rather than direct and ultra-brutal military occupation, and not implemented the forced slave labour and harsh economic exploitation? Would that have made any change to the outcome of the war?

 

[Premu]

Here's a bit of a different take on the thread's titlel, as the discussion seems to have moved away from it.

What if the Nazis had not doubled down on their ideas about Slavic sub-humans and instead tried a system of sympathic reactionary or fascist puppet states, rather than direct and ultra-brutal military occupation, and not implemented the forced slave labour and harsh economic exploitation? Would that have made any change to the outcome of the war?

Then they wouldn't have been Nazis.

The whole attack on the Sovjet Union was driven by the ideology that Germany needs "Lebensraum" and that the natives were sub-humans who need to "disappear" so that German settlers can follow.

Without that ideology, no attack on the Sovjet Union would have taken part.