The Phony War: What was Britain & France waiting for?

I think Friedrich simply has too many things to do and so we´ll have to be happy whenever he has the time to make a few comments. I think though that the General is watching us quite often, as he is as heavily addicted to WW2 discussions as we are...

 

The britain and france were waiting..... knw why??Adlof Hitler always said to go to east.i.e. Russia..total europe was suffering the favour of communism..britain,america,france were expecting after occupy poland Hitler will get military strtagic point to attack Russia.even before war sudden rise of germany was an impact of american industrialist and Hitler cunningly showed himself as the only strong opponent against communism in europe.and those foolish british and french thinking that the two giant Russia and Germany will fight each other and make the way for the Britain and France to become the super power of europe where they alredy lost during that time.the military genious Hitler said his general several time that the wESTERN DEMOCRACY IS UNABLE TO ATTACK US... again allied was not introduced the modern tank warfare..they were waiting the further attack on Russia bt do not expecting the sudden panger attack against them......actually if the Winter doesnt came earlier no one can Stop German invantion

 

The grand plan for a new conflict against Germany rested on a few phases. France and Britain had defined roles in this plan, and like most elaborate plans... it was bollocks.

The makup of allied forces would be that France had a large army (famed for beeing the best in the world in the 30ies) and a modern sizeable airforce. Britain would have it's large navy and a modern airforce and a small modern professional army.

The strategy against Germany would be a total blockade from the Royal Navy and the French navy. This would starve the German war industry and the people, sapping the ability and will to conduct war. The combined airforce would bomb germany to pieces to hasten the starving process. While this was going on the Armies would sit behind the Maginot line fending off waves of desperate assaults, and troops woould train for the coming offensive into Germany. The Naval and Air campaign would smash the Germans and reduced them to a 'suitable level' (yes that is how specific the Staffers phrased it) then a massive knockout blow would be delivered from the army. Plenty of Armoured brigades would run riot deep into Germany after the infantry had paved way.

It is quite fascinating to see how the leaders drew up a perfect set-piece battle that was to work no matter what the Germans did. It's just that the governments never gave their armed forces enough money to make it work. And to make matters worse the Germans were not loyal to the plan. They did not attack where they should.

Backwards thinking, political turmoil (especially in France) and failure to forge a true alliance (the command issue was horrible) were some of the ingredients to make the Allies highly impotent in 1940

 

The aircraft & documents were lost in January, not May. The documents were not the complete offensive plan. They were a large part of the Luftwaffes general order for the campaign. Target lists, unit assigments, coordinationing instructions for ground liasion. Of course any average intellegence analyst could infer the over all plan from the target lists and liasion information.

The plan the Germans had in place in Jaunary 1940 was for seizing Belgium and Holland, with the main effort (schwerpunckt) on the central Belgian plain, not in the Ardennes. The Sickle Cut plan actually used in May 1940 was not yet fully formed and still being tested in map exercises.

 

The Depression was also a recent event. Most countries did not have the industrial machinery of the United States - and it still took some repositioning for the U.S. to convert its industries into the production of items needed for War. Britain was not a major producer of food - they would require materials and produce from the Commonwealth countries and credit to buy what they needed from the U.S.

The United States was adamantly isolationist at the beginning of the War. U.S. Ambassador Kennedy wrote Great Britain off from the very beginning. England and France need the help of its overseas Allies such as the Commonwealth countries such as Canada, Australia, etc. and the U.S. in World War I. I don't believe that after seeing the preparation of the German military, its people, and its movement into Austria, etc. that France and Britain using common sense would expect to defeat Germany without those same allies again.

Michelle

 

Reason for that in my opinion is simple and repeated him self before and would happen again in future basically English and french decided not to help Poland at all for sake of their country and hoping Germans will stop their military actions there.Reason I am writing that is to remind everybody here so Poland would not only hold german attack but defend themselves completely if they won't be attacked from east by Russia in the second week of aggression nobody point that here and this was reason of polish army defeat.thank you

 

Could you post this again,but in a more understandable form ?

 

So many factors as I see it, the depression slowed economies of the, later to be, Allies, the thought of the slow grind of a trench style warfare as was experienced in WWI made things dreaded, and lets face it Germany was a bully mostly to smaller regions at first. There was an isolationist attitude amongst the larger powers combined with a hope that Germany would limit its aggression to the smaller less powerful and they placed a lot of hope on diplomacy with Hitler and Hitler played it up to carefully exploit all their reservations until he could plan a blow against the very people he was being friendly with. In this way he orchestrated a very large head start against his opposition. Each country in the depression saw the slow growth of their own economy as a sign they needed peace for a longer period to try to regain lost impetus so they felt it was too risky to engage against Germany. Remember there was little economic recovery apparent until WWII production began in most of these country's economies.

 

The reaction from B+F was very natural :in april they had promised to help Poland wth all means available in case of German attacK
what happened in september?
As Britain had no means to help Poland,they could not help it.
France was helping Poland with was available (the Saar offensive),but,what was available was limited.
What most people are forgetting is that in september 1939 there was a numerical equality between the French and German forces,with as result that a French attack only had few chances to succeed .

 

I would question the "parity", France in 1939 has a smaller army than Germany, due to a smaller population base, but that comparison doesn't take into account the other allied armies (Poland and Britain).
In early September the BEF was still a token force but over 50% of the German army was East. After the fall of Poland and the arival of the BEF there was a rough parity (the Germans still had to keep a substantial force East) but the Allied grand strategy was to wear down Germany by bombing and blockade not to to engage in a repeat of the WW1 meatgrinder.
IMO the Saar offensive was a half harted affair, France had a a window of opportunity before the Polish collapse allowed the German to redeploy forces west but as they were sure an attrition strategy would win them a less costly victory, and it probably would have worked comparing the long term industrial capabilities, they chose not to risk a major offensive. IMO the very existence of the Maginot was a sign that no real help was planned for it's Eastern allies, you don't use up a significant part of your military budget to create a fortified line when you plan to leave it behind to attack in support of a threatened ally.