Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

What battle on the Western Front?

Discussion in 'World War 2' started by germanm36tunic, Jan 1, 2006.

  1. germanm36tunic

    germanm36tunic New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arkansas
    via TanksinWW2
    The battle on the western that sealed the fate would be the few months of d-day. But right behind would be the Battle of the Bulge.
     
  2. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    My vote would be Dunkirk.

    That meant that a sizable chunk of the Free-Europeans and BEF were able to escape to Britain, carry on fighting and in the long run that arguably ultimately made D-Day possible in the first place.
     
  3. Canadian_Super_Patriot

    Canadian_Super_Patriot recruit

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,579
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    I think it was D-day.
     
  4. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    It's debatable whether Britain would have stuck it out if the BEF had been crushed and captured at Dunkirk instead of escaping to be re-armed and re-equipped in Britain.

    It is worth pointing out that for all the defiance remembered some 65 years later now, Chamberlain had only recently been removed from office at the time of Dunkirk, Britain had faced a string of defeats (The scuttling of Graf Spee being about the only exception, despite some local victories in France and Norway both campaigns were lost), Churchill's government was not overly popular and the desire to continue war with Germany was hardly unanimous.

    If the BEF had been captured and held to ransom, the pro-German/anti-war lobby may well have ousted Churchill on the grounds that there was precious little left of the Army to carry on the fight with and sued for peace with Germany.

    Without Britain for it to be launched and prepared from, an invasion of Northern Europe almost becomes an impossibility.
     
  5. sovietsniper

    sovietsniper New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Messages:
    201
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Strangy pearl harbour, on the other side of the world. With-out it the americans woudnt have entered.
     
  6. germanm36tunic

    germanm36tunic New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arkansas
    via TanksinWW2
    I think that the capture of the BEF at Dunkrik would most likely made the british come to a peace. But I doubt Chruchill would have.
     
  7. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    I would actually agree here. So much is made of British determination to resist in 1940 that we gloss over the fact that some very senior members of government wanted to deal with the Germans. Plus of course it's very easy for someone to say now (And possibly believe it) "We would have fought to the death" knowing that it didn't actually come to that.

    If the Panzers had started to roll through their own town or village, they may have not felt quite so determined.

    With the German Army holding the BEF hostage as bargaining chips, it wouldn't take too much of a leap of the imagination to have Churchill replaced by a PM more agreeable to the Germans.

    Then the situation becomes potentially very interesting and potentially very different. When Japan attacks European colonies in 1941 what happens next?
     
  8. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Most of the resources the Japanese needed were widely available in the Dutch Indies; they could have taken those without seriously upsetting the British.
     
  9. Vassilli

    Vassilli New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2

    BEF ???? :oops:
     
  10. Man

    Man New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
  11. Vassilli

    Vassilli New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    hello camrade!!!! but I think the americans would have join anyway because of political reasons
     
  12. Notmi

    Notmi New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Suomi Finland Perkele
    via TanksinWW2
    I thought it was British Expendable Force :eek:
     
  13. Mutant Poodle

    Mutant Poodle New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,480
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jupiter's Fourth Moon.
    via TanksinWW2
    I agree, once the USA government and powerful industrialist saw that Germany could not win the war, outright, both knew they had to get inthe fighting war to continue the Empire building. Again this is about the political aspects.

    Good point

    Noam Chomsky, MIT, gives an excellent source of info on this subject.
     
  14. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    FDR and his goverment wanted to join the war against europe already in 1940 but the people didn't want war. i still think that when pearl harbor didn't happen, the American people never would accept war against germany
     
  15. Notmi

    Notmi New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Suomi Finland Perkele
    via TanksinWW2
    Yet US was already in shooting war against Germany. I dont think it would have taken too long for American public opinion to accept war.
     
  16. sovietsniper

    sovietsniper New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Messages:
    201
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    I agree also. Hello comrade vassili
     
  17. Vassilli

    Vassilli New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    If the germans had won the battle of britain america would hav joined immediatly because of the power the 3rd reich would have had to counter america
     
  18. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    hmm, it might but that would mean that every U-boot would be used against the american eastern shorline so the americans will loos a lot of ships. and there's no way that both parties could controle the atlantic. the kriegsmarine was to small and the american navy wasn't capable to fight off the u-boats.
     
  19. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    But the USN could quickly develop ASW weapons & techniques, whereas the Kriegsmarine could never, ever hope to out-produce the USN...

    Add in long-range US planes, and you have a clear winner.
     
  20. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    but don't forget that america has to fight on two fornts and this time, there no british to help, meaning, if there ever has to an invasion, america need a lot of troops for it.
     

Share This Page