Could France and Great Britain defeated the Germans in 1939?

When Hitler invaded Poland he gambled that the allies would not declare war on Germany, this was a gamble he lost and Germany found themselves in the dreaded two front war they had wanted to avoid. Was ensued was to become known as the "The Phoney War " a relatively quiet eight-month period with no major operations on the Western font except for the Saar Offensive which saw France make gains into Germany. However they stopped abruptly with both France and the UK doubting that this was going to break out into an actual major conflict and instead played the wait and see game.
During this time there were options on the table. It was suggested that the RAF should drop incendiaries to burn Germanys ammunition dumps in the Black Forest. Charles De Gaulle called for a major tank offensive against Germany, what would of happened to Germany had France and Britain invaded west Germany whilst the Polish offensive was ongoing? Would this of stopped the Russians invading Eastern Poland and therefore kept Poland in the war longer
The Maginot line did exactly what it was supposed to do, what If Britain and France had not moved their troops forward into Belgium, which helped the Germans, which they were under no treaty obligation to do. They would have been stationed almost exactly where they were needed to stop and cutoff the German sickle plan.


What do you think? Would any of this stopped the German march across Western Europe?

Higgins86 said:

When Hitler invaded Poland he gambled that the allies would not declare war on Germany, this was a gamble he lost and Germany found themselves in the dreaded two front war they had wanted to avoid. Was ensued was to become known as the "The Phoney War " a relatively quiet eight-month period with no major operations on the Western font except for the Saar Offensive which saw France make gains into Germany. However they stopped abruptly with both France and the UK doubting that this was going to break out into an actual major conflict and instead played the wait and see game.
During this time there were options on the table. It was suggested that the RAF should drop incendiaries to burn Germanys ammunition dumps in the Black Forest. Charles De Gaulle called for a major tank offensive against Germany, what would of happened to Germany had France and Britain invaded west Germany whilst the Polish offensive was ongoing? Would this of stopped the Russians invading Eastern Poland and therefore kept Poland in the war longer
The Maginot line did exactly what it was supposed to do, what If Britain and France had not moved their troops forward into Belgium, which helped the Germans, which they were under no treaty obligation to do. They would have been stationed almost exactly where they were needed to stop and cutoff the German sickle plan.


What do you think? Would any of this stopped the German march across Western Europe?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Germany effectively stripped their western front for troops to invade Poland.

And, given the relative weakness of German tanks it would have been an interesting series of battles.

If the Brits or the French reacted during Germany's rape of Czechoslovakia Hitler's regime would have collapsed right then and there- the German high command was planning a coup and would have deposed him immediately had the allies declared war right then and there so it would have been even sooner if they had acted earlier.

PoS said:

If the Brits or the French reacted during Germany's rape of Czechoslovakia Hitler's regime would have collapsed right then and there- the German high command was planning a coup and would have deposed him immediately had the allies declared war right then and there so it would have been even sooner if they had acted earlier.

Click to expand...

Fiction is not an interest of mine including speculation that the German officer class were prepared to disregard the Prussian tradition of loyalty to the state especially in time of war.

Heinrich said:

Fiction is not an interest of mine including speculation that the German officer class were prepared to disregard the Prussian tradition of loyalty to the state especially in time of war.

Click to expand...

Well you obviously havent been reading on the subject because the military high command disliked Hitler from the very beginning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_resistance_to_Nazism#Resistance_in_the_Army_1938.E2.80.9342

What Fled said

PoS said:

Well you obviously havent been reading on the subject because the military high command disliked Hitler from the very beginning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_resistance_to_Nazism#Resistance_in_the_Army_1938.E2.80.9342

Click to expand...

Like the English upper class who treat the working class with contempt, their Prussian counterparts considered themselves also superior to ordinary Germans and indeed must have had a low opinion about a non-commissioned soldier (Iron Cross First Class) from WWI to be unfit as Chancellor and their boss. No doubt these Junker types cracked their superior jokes over schnapps and a cigar after dinner of an evening. But for all their self-importance, they were morally weak, cowards, and dithering traitors who wanted the English and the French to do what they had years to do themselves but failed, to resist the Führer. The English knew those weasels did not have the backbone to depose Hitler.

All this is pure fiction that can go many ways. If Germany's fortunes had been a little harder earlier in the war, they might not have invaded the USSR or considered honoring their alliance with the Japanese in 1941 and actually win the war in Western Europe. Just one of many possible scenarios that are but useless thought experiments.

Higgins86 said:

When Hitler invaded Poland he gambled that the allies would not declare war on Germany, this was a gamble he lost and Germany found themselves in the dreaded two front war they had wanted to avoid. Was ensued was to become known as the "The Phoney War " a relatively quiet eight-month period with no major operations on the Western font except for the Saar Offensive which saw France make gains into Germany. However they stopped abruptly with both France and the UK doubting that this was going to break out into an actual major conflict and instead played the wait and see game.
During this time there were options on the table. It was suggested that the RAF should drop incendiaries to burn Germanys ammunition dumps in the Black Forest. Charles De Gaulle called for a major tank offensive against Germany, what would of happened to Germany had France and Britain invaded west Germany whilst the Polish offensive was ongoing? Would this of stopped the Russians invading Eastern Poland and therefore kept Poland in the war longer
The Maginot line did exactly what it was supposed to do, what If Britain and France had not moved their troops forward into Belgium, which helped the Germans, which they were under no treaty obligation to do. They would have been stationed almost exactly where they were needed to stop and cutoff the German sickle plan.


What do you think? Would any of this stopped the German march across Western Europe?

Click to expand...

I think a more aggressive stance early on, such as this one, would have been your (England and France's) best shot at taking down the Reich. Quite possibly do-able.


Unfortunate that certain parties dithered and lost the initiative.... that lead to a much more costly war.




A lesson for us in the modern day, perhaps...

What often gets overlooked in these what-ifs (here "if UK and France had done" whatever) is that they would only have worked, even in the most hypothetical manner, if they'd include the premise of "what if allied capacity had been".

One has to go a step back in this particular scenario to check that out and the result doesn't favor the initial allies.

It wouldn't put Germany into such a superior position either but, seeing how it by then had the initiative on its side, into a more superior one.

Where a lot of Chamberlain's policy, for instance, may rightly be lambasted as appeasement, the fact remains that he bought Britain time. Whether he was aware of it or not. Britain was not ready in 1938 and barely in 1939.

As to the Maginot line, it wound up serving no purpose at all since the much of the motorized columns from Germany came thru the Ardennes.

Leading to the question "what if the French hadn't been so confidently sure of no German armored unit being able to traverse the mountainous forest there, what if allied intelligence hadn't been so massively screwed up as to not notice that the Germans had initially got themselves so stuck in a self created traffic jam there, that they'd have been sitting ducks for any aerial attack".

What if Hitler hadn't got cold feet and hesitated at Dunkirk, thus spoiling a brilliant advance and saving the core of the Brit army to evacuate and regroup.

What if the Panzer commanders had not taken the gamble that they indeed took (the speed with which they moved was not planned) and what if the gamble hadn't paid off.

Higgins86 said:

When Hitler invaded Poland he gambled that the allies would not declare war on Germany, this was a gamble he lost and Germany found themselves in the dreaded two front war they had wanted to avoid. Was ensued was to become known as the "The Phoney War " a relatively quiet eight-month period with no major operations on the Western font except for the Saar Offensive which saw France make gains into Germany. However they stopped abruptly with both France and the UK doubting that this was going to break out into an actual major conflict and instead played the wait and see game.
During this time there were options on the table. It was suggested that the RAF should drop incendiaries to burn Germanys ammunition dumps in the Black Forest. Charles De Gaulle called for a major tank offensive against Germany, what would of happened to Germany had France and Britain invaded west Germany whilst the Polish offensive was ongoing? Would this of stopped the Russians invading Eastern Poland and therefore kept Poland in the war longer
The Maginot line did exactly what it was supposed to do, what If Britain and France had not moved their troops forward into Belgium, which helped the Germans, which they were under no treaty obligation to do. They would have been stationed almost exactly where they were needed to stop and cutoff the German sickle plan.


What do you think? Would any of this stopped the German march across Western Europe?

Click to expand...

No. Hitler used treaties and agreements to buy him enough time to build his machine. His plan was long set into motion and it went so far as to invent the reason to invade Poland. England and France would not have been able to stop him unless they had intervened much earlier.

Higgins86 said:

When Hitler invaded Poland he gambled that the allies would not declare war on Germany, this was a gamble he lost and Germany found themselves in the dreaded two front war they had wanted to avoid...

Click to expand...

Where do you get this nonsense for your opening sentence ??

Adolf did not give a ratz azz about England or France. He wanted his half of Poland.

He had a deal with Stalin and they had carved Poland up.

Do some reading and then start a new thread.

Goshin said:

I think a more aggressive stance early on, such as this one, would have been your (England and France's) best shot at taking down the Reich. Quite possibly do-able.


Unfortunate that certain parties dithered and lost the initiative.... that lead to a much more costly war.




A lesson for us in the modern day, perhaps...

Click to expand...

The O/P's opening fallacy does not bother you at all Goshin ??

You are usually pretty good at history and at details.

PoS said:

If the Brits or the French reacted during Germany's rape of Czechoslovakia Hitler's regime would have collapsed right then and there- the German high command was planning a coup and would have deposed him immediately had the allies declared war right then and there so it would have been even sooner if they had acted earlier.

Click to expand...

You're right as usual POS -- the trepid English and French did not want another WW1 so they tipped their hand -- their hand was empty.

Riveroaks said:

Where do you get this nonsense for your opening sentence ??

Adolf did not give a ratz azz about England or France. He wanted his half of Poland.

He had a deal with Stalin and they had carved Poland up.

Do some reading and then start a new thread.

Click to expand...

It's pretty well known that Hitler was taken aback by the declaration as were many of his Generals. Hitler did not expect France or England to declare war over Danzig. The Nazis had a claim to the Free City of Danzig and Polish territory. The so-called Polish Corridor constituted land long disputed by Poland and Germany, and inhabited by a Polish majority. The Corridor had become a part of Poland after the Treaty of Versailles and many in the Reich felt like they had a claim to hit similar to other previous campaigns. They also thought that Britain and France would look the other way again.
If Hitler was expecting a declaration from allies why did he then move the majority of his army onto the eastern front and why did he approach Britain with peace terms under the understanding that Poland's future would be decided by Germany? ( a request refused by Neville).
Germany had been encrypting British diplomatic messages for months and believed Britain were bluffing.

Your essentially saying that Hitler knew that the allies would declare war which would open up a second front and that Hitler somehow knew that a "phoneywar" would ensue on the western front giving Germany time to take Poland and bolster their forces in the West. That would not only be the biggest gamble in military history it would also be a stroke of genius, something Hitler failed to display at any point in the war.

I would suggest you do some reading on the build up to the Polish Invasion before you start talking down to me.

Higgins86 said:

It's pretty well known that Hitler was taken aback by the declaration as were many of his Generals. Hitler did not expect France or England to declare war over Danzig. The Nazis had a claim to the Free City of Danzig and Polish territory. The so-called Polish Corridor constituted land long disputed by Poland and Germany, and inhabited by a Polish majority. The Corridor had become a part of Poland after the Treaty of Versailles and many in the Reich felt like they had a claim to hit similar to other previous campaigns. They also thought that Britain and France would look the other way again.
If Hitler was expecting a declaration from allies why did he then move the majority of his army onto the eastern front and why did he approach Britain with peace terms under the understanding that Poland's future would be decided by Germany? ( a request refused by Neville).
Germany had been encrypting British diplomatic messages for months and believed Britain were bluffing.

Your essentially saying that Hitler knew that the allies would declare war which would open up a second front and that Hitler somehow knew that a "phoneywar" would ensue on the western front giving Germany time to take Poland and bolster their forces in the West. That would not only be the biggest gamble in military history it would also be a stroke of genius, something Hitler failed to display at any point in the war.

I would suggest you do some reading on the build up to the Polish Invasion before you start talking down to me.

Click to expand...

Your opening sentence is still a blunder. There was NO two front war. Poland was carved up.

Adolf was itching for a fight with France and did not care about England.

Your thread is all wet.

It's BS.

Riveroaks said:

Your opening sentence is still a blunder. There was NO two front war. Poland was carved up.

Adolf was itching for a fight with France and did not care about England.

Your thread is all wet.

It's BS.

Click to expand...

Of course there was a two war front, Britain and France declared war before Poland had fallen and the Saar offensive began before Poland surrendered.

As for not caring about England again you're wrong and haven't provided any evidence to your point. But I will start you off on some key points as to why Hitler didn't think the Uk would declare war.


-Ribbentrop, was the Nazi 'British expert', and repeatedly advised Hitler that Britain would not go to war for Poland.
-The German Ambassador in London, Herbert von Dirksen, reported that Chamberlain knew "the social structure of Britain, even the conception of the British Empire, would not survive the chaos of even a victorious war"
-Ribbentrop provided translations from pro-appeasement newspapers like the Daily Mail and the Daily Express and convinced Hitler that the British government controlled the British press, as the Nazis did theirs.
-The Germans had broken the British diplomatic codes and were reading the messages between the Foreign Office in London to and from the Embassy in Warsaw showing tension in Anglo-Polish relations over the Danzig question.
-On the basis of von Ribentropp's advice, the code-breaking intelligence, and his own instinct, Hitler believed that the British were bluffing.

Higgins86 said:

Of course there was a two war front, Britain and France declared war before Poland had fallen and the Saar offensive began before Poland surrendered.

As for not caring about England again you're wrong and haven't provided any evidence to your point. But I will start you off on some key points as to why Hitler didn't think the Uk would declare war.


-Ribbentrop, was the Nazi 'British expert', and repeatedly advised Hitler that Britain would not go to war for Poland.
-The German Ambassador in London, Herbert von Dirksen, reported that Chamberlain knew "the social structure of Britain, even the conception of the British Empire, would not survive the chaos of even a victorious war"
-Ribbentrop provided translations from pro-appeasement newspapers like the Daily Mail and the Daily Express and convinced Hitler that the British government controlled the British press, as the Nazis did theirs.
-The Germans had broken the British diplomatic codes and were reading the messages between the Foreign Office in London to and from the Embassy in Warsaw showing tension in Anglo-Polish relations over the Danzig question.
-On the basis of von Ribentropp's advice, the code-breaking intelligence, and his own instinct, Hitler believed that the British were bluffing.

Click to expand...

Jeeze. Youre still clueless.

So that's what you really think huh ???

Adolf had brought his depressed country out of The Great Depression with deficit spending by building up the most powerful army and air force in the world.

England and France had both disarmed and Poland still had only real horses in their cavalry.

You should read more.

Riveroaks said:

Jeeze. Youre still clueless.

So that's what you really think huh ???

Adolf had brought his depressed country out of The Great Depression with deficit spending by building up the most powerful army and air force in the world.

England and France had both disarmed and Poland still had only real horses in their cavalry.

You should read more.

Click to expand...

Britain and France had disarmed? Where are you getting that from? At the start of the war France and one of the largest tank forces in the world, their issue was that they had planned for a defensive conflict like WW1 and were easily outmaneuvered however when they were able to mount attacks they were very effective. During the battle of France one CharB1 attacked and destroyed 12 German tanks all of them Panzer III's and Panzer IV's, total tank assets for the French were around 6k. Now I agree they were lacking on automotive's but the French had a decent sized Army, It was poor planning/indecision that cost the French. As for the Britain well our Navy at the time was still the best in the business and was another key factor in why Hitler wanted to avoid conflict with England as long as he could, the blockade of WW1 still fresh in Germany's memory.

Not really going to continue with this debate with you and thus far you have brought nothing to the table other than your own opinion and what you have seen on the history channel.

Riveroaks said:

Jeeze. Youre still clueless.

So that's what you really think huh ???

Adolf had brought his depressed country out of The Great Depression with deficit spending by building up the most powerful army and air force in the world.

England and France had both disarmed and Poland still had only real horses in their cavalry.

You should read more.

Click to expand...

Errrrrrrrrrr......

Germany still used horses for much of the logistics and artillery transport throughout the war.

They had six Cavalry divisions in 1945.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horses_in_World_War_II

There were horses in practically every military in WWII

Riveroaks said:

Jeeze. Youre still clueless.

So that's what you really think huh ???

Adolf had brought his depressed country out of The Great Depression with deficit spending by building up the most powerful army and air force in the world.

England and France had both disarmed and Poland still had only real horses in their cavalry.

You should read more.

Click to expand...

Actually you should. In 1939 the largest army/military in western Europe was France. They had considerably more tanks, planes and men.. their problem was leadership and lack of investment. Most of their planes were still bi-planes. They had thrown everything into the Maginot line... and that failed.

PeteEU said:

Actually you should. In 1939 the largest army/military in western Europe was France. They had considerably more tanks, planes and men.. their problem was leadership and lack of investment. Most of their planes were still bi-planes. They had thrown everything into the Maginot line... and that failed.

Click to expand...

The German Army in the Second World War

France was not mobilized. Do you know what mobilized means ??

Fledermaus said:

Errrrrrrrrrr......

Germany still used horses for much of the logistics and artillery transport throughout the war.

They had six Cavalry divisions in 1945.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horses_in_World_War_II

There were horses in practically every military in WWII

Click to expand...

Hauling Arty is not a bad job for horses.

And a few German officers still brought their horses with them in the Infantry. Unfortunately it made them an easy target for the long range M-1's of the US Army.

Motorcycles with side cars eventually replaced all horses, and trucks for hauling Arty.

It was a slow evolution from the pre WW1 daze when fools like French and Haig from the UK thought horse cavalry charges would with dash and elan win battles in wars.

That never happened again after Africa.

Higgins86 said:

Britain and France had disarmed? Where are you getting that from? At the start of the war France and one of the largest tank forces in the world, their issue was that they had planned for a defensive conflict like WW1 and were easily outmaneuvered however when they were able to mount attacks they were very effective. During the battle of France one CharB1 attacked and destroyed 12 German tanks all of them Panzer III's and Panzer IV's, total tank assets for the French were around 6k. Now I agree they were lacking on automotive's but the French had a decent sized Army, It was poor planning/indecision that cost the French. As for the Britain well our Navy at the time was still the best in the business and was another key factor in why Hitler wanted to avoid conflict with England as long as he could, the blockade of WW1 still fresh in Germany's memory.

Not really going to continue with this debate with you and thus far you have brought nothing to the table other than your own opinion and what you have seen on the history channel.

Click to expand...

If you read, you will learn that everyone had disarmed after WW1.

Adolf first trained a corps of 200,000 officers. Then he mobilized several million more enlisted me.

Pretty soon he had the biggest mobilized army in Europe. So he did not care about England or France.

So far your thread is an entire fiction based on the anachronism of WW1.

It was England, France, and Russia who each feared Adolf. You have the shoe on the wrong foot.

Riveroaks said:

If you read, you will learn that everyone had disarmed after WW1.

Adolf first trained a corps of 200,000 officers. Then he mobilized several million more enlisted me.

Pretty soon he had the biggest mobilized army in Europe. So he did not care about England or France.

So far your thread is an entire fiction based on the anachronism of WW1.

It was England, France, and Russia who each feared Adolf. You have the shoe on the wrong foot.

Click to expand...

As myself and others have pointed out France had a decent sized force in 1939, they were just deployed wrong. France put to much faith in the idea that the Germans wouldn't come through the Ardennes. If they had prepared for that the War could of gone very differently.

As for Hitler no he didn't fear anyone however he had no interest in war with England. He admired England's ruling class, we were Anglo Saxons and of course our navy was formidable. He didn't think we would enter the war and even when we did he still tried to keep us neutral.
Good article below which highlights this.

Nazis ?offered to leave western Europe in exchange for free hand to attack USSR? - Telegraph


A lot of historians also think that Hitler halted at Dunkirk as a good will gesture to the British.