I think we should also applaud that stretch of water known as the English Channel, it flawed the Germans because they couldn't enforce their Blitzkreig tactic that allowed them to walk into Poland, France etc... A brilliant piece of water.
The 65th anniversary of the Allied Normandy landings
- Thread starter Scania
- Start date
And not just WW2 of course, the English Channel has saved us in wars for several hundred years.
Too bad it wasn't regarded properly by the French with their latest stunt.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18013597
oh WTF
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
They will be remembered.
This thread reminds me of when I read about France pulling out of Nato in the 1960s and Charles de Gaulle demanded all troops leave French soil.
President Johnson asked if that included all the buried ones as well.
Food for thought for Mr de Gaulle. Ungrateful ******* that he was.
This thread reminds me of when I read about France pulling out of Nato in the 1960s and Charles de Gaulle demanded all troops leave French soil.
President Johnson asked if that included all the buried ones as well.
Food for thought for Mr de Gaulle. Ungrateful ******* that he was.
Mr Brown got rather an unwelcome greeting as he came up to give his speech, other than the fact he is a total plank, anyone know the reason?
I must say, I always forget about these days
Watching it now because I've always had a fascination with the war. Great respect for anyone that puts their life on the line to help protect anything or anyone!!
I must say, I always forget about these days
Watching it now because I've always had a fascination with the war. Great respect for anyone that puts their life on the line to help protect anything or anyone!!Mr Brown got rather an unwelcome greeting as he came up to give his speech, other than the fact he is a total plank, anyone know the reason?
I must say, I always forget about these days
Brown booed and heckled at D-Day commemoration
http://tonysharp.blogspot.com/2009/06/brown-booed-and-heckled-at-d-day.html
Barack Obama saw him call 'Omaha Beach' where some of the landings took place 'Obama Beach
Stupid ****
Obama Beach...................................how long is this idiot going to last lol. If only some lunatic could shoot him. Making me angry just thinking about it, bloody useless brown nosing ******* disgrace. Prince Charles should be only one making speach tbh Brown needs stay out of anything important to do with other leaders
Last edited:
Brown booed and heckled at D-Day commemoration
http://tonysharp.blogspot.com/2009/06/brown-booed-and-heckled-at-d-day.html
Barack Obama saw him call 'Omaha Beach' where some of the landings took place 'Obama Beach
Stupid ****
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 944
Most have probably seen it anyway but an interesting program about what happened on Omaha beach here on the iplayer
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b008p88c/Timewatch_Bloody_Omaha/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b008p88c/Timewatch_Bloody_Omaha/
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 8,537
german weapons (tanks) were far outclassed by that of the french, it was poor military planning and indecisive use of french assets that lead to their defeat, the panzer I and II were crap. Heinz Guderian just used them well.
Whats the music in the video? I recognise it but cant place it...
edit: It just came to me,
Im sure its blackhawk down, near the end when they are pulling out and reflecting on what happened.
Last edited:
The French army had two distinct lines of development for tanks. The first was infantry support while the second role was cavalry reconnissance.
For infantry support the French went at first with essentially what were improved versions of their very successful FT 17 of WW 1. These vehicles included the Renault 35 and 39, Hotchkiss 35 and 36 and the somewhat larger FCM 36. All were two man vehicles with moderately heavy armor and were equipped with a stubby 37mm gun and a macinegun. Their main purpose was to assist the infantry not fight tanks. Very late H39 and R39 models did receive a longer 37mm gun once the French realized that their tanks needed a bit more firepower for the antitank role. This however, did little to make them suitable for tank on tank combat.
All of these vehicles were without radio. Their tactics were rigid and plodding. All of this fit well with their role of infantry support in a set piece battle reminensent of 1918.
The next generation infantry tanks were the heavier vehicles like the Char D1, D2 and, B1 bis. These had more armor and firepower. The first two were really just larger versions of the earlier Renault and Hotchkiss tanks with little more capacity for anything other than infantry support.
The Char B1 bis could best be described as a mobile version of an Ouverage. Sort of a miniature, mobile Maginot line! As an antitank vehicle it was nearly worthless. Its primary role was to literally be a mobile artillery bunker on the battlefield. The inclusion of a turret was more as a defensive measure much like a cloche in a Maginot line bunker.
On the cavalry side of things their tanks were developed for the narrowly defined role of scouting. The light versions like the AMR 33 were for long range reconnissance. Mostly armed with a machinegun they were for scouting and patrolling ahead of the main body of the army in the advance. The heavier Souma S35 was for battlefield reconnissance. Its primary role was to scout not fight. Fighting tanks was definitely a secondary consideration to the reconnissance role.
When you couple these designs to the French doctrine of Methodical Battle you get a collection of lethargic near blind tanks that were hardly capable of fighting a mobile battle of any sort. Their intended employment was in the context of a static battlefield where tanks operated at a leisurely pace in a very scripted battleplan. To sum them up, they were design failures across the board.
I'm pretty sure thats not the case, I have a book about the land battle for France and I'm sure it was the other way around.
In a nutshell, the Germans had far better military planners.
How fortunate for us all that Hitler decided he was a military God and took over military descisions towards the end of the war!!!
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 8,537
they weren't suited to the war forced upon them (a mobile war) then they were used ineffectively (by having them act as infantry support instead of in dedicated tank battalions.) they still outclassed the majority of german tanks they faced at the time. Panzer IIIs were still in very short supply during the invasion of france.
the french army (much like the late mid/late period german army) were let down by their high command, not their equipement
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 944
They also had more recent combat experience not only from invading Poland but also from the Spanish civil war?
+1
There's also the small matter of the Maginot Line. Theoretically, it was an ideal defence - and indeed, it was sufficient to deter a direct frontal assault.
Unfortunately the Germans caught everyone off guard by attacking the Line at its strongest point with a combined air/land offensive which broke Fort Eben-Emael within a mere two days. This allowed them to enter Belgium, outflank the Line, and attack France through her neighbour - a scenario which nobody appears to have anticipated.
The Germans made many mistakes during the War, but they had moments of tactical genius and this was one of them. Don't even get me started on Rommel; the man was an absolute hero.