@BeatsNC Im not french, but the french foreign legion were ready to fight, and legionare caught going into battle vs the nazi's could have been shot dead by their own people, the politicians are the ones who went weak in the knees not the people of france. orders are orders.
Soviets did not have superiority in numbers in front of the Moscow. Germans had more tanks and plaines and winter did not stop germans but russian guts. There were 2 german ofensives on Moscow and soviet counterofensive. Before overvhelming enemy Russians fought and were victorious. German pincers north and south of the Moscow were stopped by guts and fighting, not by winter.
You seems to forget the decisive factor. The huge USSR territory, twice USA size. Soviets were overcrushed during 2 years, and lost more than 4 millions prisoners in the hands of Wehrmacht. A lot of them were exterminated in death Nazi camps.
Incorrect. The Allied armies were bigger and stronger than the Germans with more tanks. The Germans attacked in the centre in force (a decoy). The British and French went to meet this attack - far too many went. Then the Germans main thrust was at Sedan. The Germans were advancing towards the coast when the British and French were still going north.
A total French and British screw up, not a wonderful German victory.
@NearAbbeyRoad Regardless of wether it was a Allied screw up or not, it was still a 'wonderful' German victory, that could have been total victory for Germany had it not been for the decision to pause the offensive whilst Allies were retreating.
A campaign that was expected to last years had been complete in 6 weeks.
France was a total victory for Germany, although unexpected by themselves. But the were fighting the UK & France combined and never defeated that combination, just winning battle.
The offensive was not paused. It was stopped by the Brits. Rommel thought he was hit by a force 3 times the size.
Britian went to war to prevent Germany from exerting power over eastern europe. In the end we had a 50 year cold war with a worldwide communist threat, and The British Empire faded away. now England is a 3rd rate power and Germany is an economic powerhouse. Also, Social Liberalism is a giant failure..the west is done
Yes they did, Poland was attacked on two sides (France on one), Poland was HUGELY outnumbered by the Germans and Russians (While France wasnt by Germany), Poland held out for roughly the same amount of time and its smaller then France, France also had help while Poland had none, Poland did very well in WW2. France did shit.
Poland was not attacked by the USSR until the Germans had done the hard bit. The Germans never used blitzkrieg on Poland. It was only used once - against France.
@NearAbbeyRoad actually poland and france both were attacked by blitzkrieg , tell me how did poland fall in just 3weeks? another thing the blitzkrieg als owoirked in russia , the german army was near leningrad and kiev in about 2 months , and that is when the russian winter took hold , the promblem for blitzkrieg in russia was that winter and as russia was just too large , and the germans were very far away from their supply lines
Blitzkrieg was only used TWICE. ON France and the USSR. The first time it succeeded as the second was a spectacular failure. It was an unrepeatable one-shot operation.
Blitzkrieg needs to pin the enemy to a wall (in France the Channel). In the USSR the enemy kept retreating and reforming. It failed in the USSR.
Russian winter did not defeat the Germans. They were stopped by the Soviet counter-attack at Moscow - a battering ram.
@NearAbbeyRoad yeah they were stopped infront of moscow when winter came and with a force 10times that of the germans (most of which were far east divisions). do you realized how many pockets can be made in a blitzkreig war , the attacker does need to pin the enemy infront of a wall , it can just bypass it on both sides and come down from all sides on them , in russia the blitzkrieg failed to win the war because of russian winter , because its armiy's size , because russia is just tooo large.
The USSR NEVER attacked Poland at the same time as Germany.
Again...Blitzkrieg was only used TWICE - France & the Low Countries and the USSR. The first was a success the last a spectacular failure. Read what I advised.
LOL, yes they invaded at the same time, but all the news reports from the times dont say so because the USSR were on good terms with Britain and America.
And, your wrong again, it was used on many countries, every country Germany invaded it was used.
How? The Russians fought hard against the Polish and it was a joint invasion if you like it or not, and how was it used only twice?? hts utter BS it was used on every country Germany invaded includin Poland.
On the other hand, what tends to have been overlooked has been the, typically, actually rather consistent effectiveness of The Free French, The French Resistance, and the units of liberated France against the forces of The Axis following The Western Allies' decisive defeat in The Battle Of France.
These units fought throughout North Africa, in considerably extensive strength in Italy, in Northern France, in Southern France, and in Germany. They even liberated Paris predominantly by themselves.
Probably, the foremost strategic issue that The Western Allies and their leadership ultimately caught themselves into (with the German leadership having deliberately taken direct advantage of) was their strong belief that The Ardennes Forest could not have realistically been pierced by substantial columns of armour.
Even when The Western Allies realised this, the leadership of The Western Allies expected a mass build-up of German artillery beyond the Ardennes, and were disorganized.
Germany tried a gamble called the blitzkrieg. Only Manstein and Hitler approved of it. It paid off beyond their dreams. Blitzkreig was unrepeatable. They tried it against the USSR and failed spectacularly.
good non-computer annimation, Walt Disney style... must be a post war flick because in 1940 no one knew who Colonel deGalle was and made a temporary brigadier just before the surrender....
-- USA is using the same tactics ,, as Germany in 1939 , their bigest mistake was , attacking CCCP , they conquered EUROPE , with propaganda that , Russian Bolsevicks , were terrorists who want to destroy GERMANY . USA is using same tactics to get to the IRAQI OIL ...
This video is great, i actually learned a lot. Along with reading about other german tactics, i saw lots of different maneuvers being used combined with the spearhead. like encirclement. i hope we can execute this in Battleground Europe: WW2ol
i am not so sure about that. In 1917, Patton with French instructors organized the American tank school in southern Burgundy and trained the first 500 American tankers, equipped with Renault tanks. He led his brigade into the Meuse-Argonne Operation in September 1918.
Thus Patton thus became the first member of the new United States Tank Corps, and an outspoken advocate for tanks.
But Patton also considerd tanks to be to unreliabale and hard to operate Logisticaly!So he went back to being a advocate of cavarly warfare for US Army!!!
It was only after he watched this and several other films about the German use of Tanks(especialy Rommel) that he completly changed his mind.
You can find alout of interesting information in several Books about Rommel&Patton.....
True, tanks were unreliable and hard to operate. From 16th to 30th May, 1940, De Gaulle's 4th armoured div. ceaselessly fought or moved from battle to battle, and lost as many tanks to mechanical breakdowns as to enemy fire.
Hard to operate in units, too, because all of them were not yet equipped with radios and when they were imagine the poor vacuum tube radio in the big shaker that a tank was...
PS This animation is an excellent overview of the campaign.
It is not quite true that the French and Brits did not had Radios in ther Tanks!
It was just that ther Radios were far inferior to the German Neck Radios!
The German Neck Radio reduced the Tank noice and the interfrence of moving tanks and allowed them to communicate far easier.Guderian camme up whit this this extremly briliant idea!You just put the Microphone on your Neck and there is no interfrence and the whole thing.
the main new weapon at the time was COMMUNICATION!! incredible but while the french field commanders had still telegraph and telephone, the Germans were using the radios and the new "Enigma" machine!!
I wish the French didn't surrender so much. Too bad.
BeatsNC 2 months ago
@BeatsNC Im not french, but the french foreign legion were ready to fight, and legionare caught going into battle vs the nazi's could have been shot dead by their own people, the politicians are the ones who went weak in the knees not the people of france. orders are orders.
animalnt 1 month ago
Soviets did not have superiority in numbers in front of the Moscow. Germans had more tanks and plaines and winter did not stop germans but russian guts. There were 2 german ofensives on Moscow and soviet counterofensive. Before overvhelming enemy Russians fought and were victorious. German pincers north and south of the Moscow were stopped by guts and fighting, not by winter.
FilmRomMusDrawingWar 5 months ago
@FilmRomMusDrawingWar
You seems to forget the decisive factor. The huge USSR territory, twice USA size. Soviets were overcrushed during 2 years, and lost more than 4 millions prisoners in the hands of Wehrmacht. A lot of them were exterminated in death Nazi camps.
Camarale 4 months ago
@FilmRomMusDrawingWar the Siberian divisions helped too in moscow gates
sheemsheem 2 months ago
@FilmRomMusDrawingWar suuure comrade, whatever you say... lol
caneman75 1 week ago
The German Blitzkrieg stunning tactic is very effective, they were masters of war
taktoka 6 months ago
WOW NICE VIDEO !!!
Krakus19900 6 months ago
Incorrect. The Allied armies were bigger and stronger than the Germans with more tanks. The Germans attacked in the centre in force (a decoy). The British and French went to meet this attack - far too many went. Then the Germans main thrust was at Sedan. The Germans were advancing towards the coast when the British and French were still going north.
A total French and British screw up, not a wonderful German victory.
NearAbbeyRoad 8 months ago
@NearAbbeyRoad Regardless of wether it was a Allied screw up or not, it was still a 'wonderful' German victory, that could have been total victory for Germany had it not been for the decision to pause the offensive whilst Allies were retreating.
A campaign that was expected to last years had been complete in 6 weeks.
geezafrombrum 5 months ago
@geezafrombrum
France was a total victory for Germany, although unexpected by themselves. But the were fighting the UK & France combined and never defeated that combination, just winning battle.
The offensive was not paused. It was stopped by the Brits. Rommel thought he was hit by a force 3 times the size.
NearAbbeyRoad 5 months ago
Comment removed
HighStake09 9 months ago
Britian went to war to prevent Germany from exerting power over eastern europe. In the end we had a 50 year cold war with a worldwide communist threat, and The British Empire faded away. now England is a 3rd rate power and Germany is an economic powerhouse. Also, Social Liberalism is a giant failure..the west is done
scotter420wigb 10 months ago
@scotter420wigb
" England is a 3rd rate power"
It is the world's 4th largest economy.
NearAbbeyRoad 8 months ago
France were useless, Poland did FAR, FAR better than the french!
mwillis1000 1 year ago 8
@mwillis1000 in case you did'nt know.80% guys from France was gay.=(
aredbunk88 10 months ago
@mwillis1000
"France were useless, Poland did FAR, FAR better than the french"
By not much at all.
NearAbbeyRoad 5 months ago
@NearAbbeyRoad
Yes they did, Poland was attacked on two sides (France on one), Poland was HUGELY outnumbered by the Germans and Russians (While France wasnt by Germany), Poland held out for roughly the same amount of time and its smaller then France, France also had help while Poland had none, Poland did very well in WW2. France did shit.
mwillis1000 5 months ago
@mwillis1000
Poland was not attacked by the USSR until the Germans had done the hard bit. The Germans never used blitzkrieg on Poland. It was only used once - against France.
NearAbbeyRoad 5 months ago
@NearAbbeyRoad actually poland and france both were attacked by blitzkrieg , tell me how did poland fall in just 3weeks? another thing the blitzkrieg als owoirked in russia , the german army was near leningrad and kiev in about 2 months , and that is when the russian winter took hold , the promblem for blitzkrieg in russia was that winter and as russia was just too large , and the germans were very far away from their supply lines
SuperTigerNo1 5 months ago
@SuperTigerNo1
Blitzkrieg was only used TWICE. ON France and the USSR. The first time it succeeded as the second was a spectacular failure. It was an unrepeatable one-shot operation.
Blitzkrieg needs to pin the enemy to a wall (in France the Channel). In the USSR the enemy kept retreating and reforming. It failed in the USSR.
Russian winter did not defeat the Germans. They were stopped by the Soviet counter-attack at Moscow - a battering ram.
Read Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze
NearAbbeyRoad 5 months ago
@NearAbbeyRoad yeah they were stopped infront of moscow when winter came and with a force 10times that of the germans (most of which were far east divisions). do you realized how many pockets can be made in a blitzkreig war , the attacker does need to pin the enemy infront of a wall , it can just bypass it on both sides and come down from all sides on them , in russia the blitzkrieg failed to win the war because of russian winter , because its armiy's size , because russia is just tooo large.
SuperTigerNo1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SuperTigerNo1
It is clear you only have half a clue what you are on about. Read Adam Tooze,that will put you right.
NearAbbeyRoad 5 months ago
@NearAbbeyRoad
Wrong, they attacked at roughly the same time, but also remember that Poland was far less advanced than France yet still held out better.
Blitzkrieg was used against Poland, France, Belgium, Holland, Norway, Russia etc etc
mwillis1000 5 months ago
@mwillis1000
The USSR NEVER attacked Poland at the same time as Germany.
Again...Blitzkrieg was only used TWICE - France & the Low Countries and the USSR. The first was a success the last a spectacular failure. Read what I advised.
NearAbbeyRoad 5 months ago
@NearAbbeyRoad
LOL, yes they invaded at the same time, but all the news reports from the times dont say so because the USSR were on good terms with Britain and America.
And, your wrong again, it was used on many countries, every country Germany invaded it was used.
mwillis1000 5 months ago
@mwillis1000
You are wrong on both points:
1. The USSR NEVER invaded Poland at the same time as Germany. POland was all done and they moved into the eastern third.
2. Blitzkrieg, a rolling conveyor belt, was used only TWICE and only once succeeded.
Do not go on Hollywood history. Read Adam Tooze, that will put you right.
NearAbbeyRoad 5 months ago
@NearAbbeyRoad
How? The Russians fought hard against the Polish and it was a joint invasion if you like it or not, and how was it used only twice?? hts utter BS it was used on every country Germany invaded includin Poland.
mwillis1000 5 months ago
@NearAbbeyRoad yup they did
FabiogtwZZ 3 months ago
The French....just another place for the Germans to kick ass
gopconservative78 1 year ago 4
DON'T TOUCH OF ALSACE AND LORRAINE. THIS IS PART OF FRANCE XD
5635Bobby 1 year ago
On the other hand, what tends to have been overlooked has been the, typically, actually rather consistent effectiveness of The Free French, The French Resistance, and the units of liberated France against the forces of The Axis following The Western Allies' decisive defeat in The Battle Of France.
These units fought throughout North Africa, in considerably extensive strength in Italy, in Northern France, in Southern France, and in Germany. They even liberated Paris predominantly by themselves.
GmanGregilla 1 year ago
Probably, the foremost strategic issue that The Western Allies and their leadership ultimately caught themselves into (with the German leadership having deliberately taken direct advantage of) was their strong belief that The Ardennes Forest could not have realistically been pierced by substantial columns of armour.
Even when The Western Allies realised this, the leadership of The Western Allies expected a mass build-up of German artillery beyond the Ardennes, and were disorganized.
GmanGregilla 1 year ago
Hitler tought he was a Military genius...
where the true Geniuses were von Manstein,Rommel and Guderian...
Usa is using simialar Tactics Today...
but they havent usd it against a strong Nation---so it remains to be seen how effective it is...
Also this tactics of encircelment was the base of German strategy since Frederik the Great and ween Germnany defeated
France in 1871 in Franco-German war...
armenius25 2 years ago
Comment removed
salvgio 2 years ago
@armenius25
Germany tried a gamble called the blitzkrieg. Only Manstein and Hitler approved of it. It paid off beyond their dreams. Blitzkreig was unrepeatable. They tried it against the USSR and failed spectacularly.
NearAbbeyRoad 5 months ago
good non-computer annimation, Walt Disney style... must be a post war flick because in 1940 no one knew who Colonel deGalle was and made a temporary brigadier just before the surrender....
oil9vinegar 2 years ago
Excellent!
YamaniNetsi 2 years ago
Thank you for the video, it is really nice!
BanditSamarskij 2 years ago
-- USA is using the same tactics ,, as Germany in 1939 , their bigest mistake was , attacking CCCP , they conquered EUROPE , with propaganda that , Russian Bolsevicks , were terrorists who want to destroy GERMANY . USA is using same tactics to get to the IRAQI OIL ...
aviomaster 2 years ago
Usa is using the same tactics --- but what 65Years later...and against Iraq.A country thats far inferiour to the Usa in any way,,,
Remeber in 1940 this tactics was something totaly new that the World has
not seen before...
Thats the reason why the Germans were able to be Victrourous on so many occasions,,,
They lost the was simply cus they were overwhelemed by sher size of ALL ALLIED
NAYIOS...93 of them.
armenius25 2 years ago 2
This video is great, i actually learned a lot. Along with reading about other german tactics, i saw lots of different maneuvers being used combined with the spearhead. like encirclement. i hope we can execute this in Battleground Europe: WW2ol
leopardgeckoWV2 2 years ago
General Patton watched this exact Film
ween he was still advocating cavarly warfare...Once he saw this and Rommel
succeses in Afrika he decided to read Rommels Book...But he newer fully grasped the full concpet of Blitzkrieg...
He was a exploiter General...Not Breaktrough General...
Read Book Patton&Rommel Man of War!
armenius25 2 years ago
i am not so sure about that. In 1917, Patton with French instructors organized the American tank school in southern Burgundy and trained the first 500 American tankers, equipped with Renault tanks. He led his brigade into the Meuse-Argonne Operation in September 1918.
Thus Patton thus became the first member of the new United States Tank Corps, and an outspoken advocate for tanks.
Fridomfry 2 years ago
Yes!It is true of what you sayd!
But Patton also considerd tanks to be to unreliabale and hard to operate Logisticaly!So he went back to being a advocate of cavarly warfare for US Army!!!
It was only after he watched this and several other films about the German use of Tanks(especialy Rommel) that he completly changed his mind.
You can find alout of interesting information in several Books about Rommel&Patton.....
armenius25 2 years ago
True, tanks were unreliable and hard to operate. From 16th to 30th May, 1940, De Gaulle's 4th armoured div. ceaselessly fought or moved from battle to battle, and lost as many tanks to mechanical breakdowns as to enemy fire.
Hard to operate in units, too, because all of them were not yet equipped with radios and when they were imagine the poor vacuum tube radio in the big shaker that a tank was...
PS This animation is an excellent overview of the campaign.
Fridomfry 2 years ago
It is not quite true that the French and Brits did not had Radios in ther Tanks!
It was just that ther Radios were far inferior to the German Neck Radios!
The German Neck Radio reduced the Tank noice and the interfrence of moving tanks and allowed them to communicate far easier.Guderian camme up whit this this extremly briliant idea!You just put the Microphone on your Neck and there is no interfrence and the whole thing.
armenius25 2 years ago
Hey where can i see more of this??
maunus 3 years ago 3
Wow, impressive graphics... Really organic.
MshrF 3 years ago 14
Nice fricken Video!!!
AngriestAmerican 3 years ago
that was really good graphics for 1940 and a better and more detailed explanation than most.
fredoflorida 3 years ago 3
The Fall of France was the true demonstration of the new German Blitzkrieg.Which is now the template of all modern warfare doctrines.
redeye117 3 years ago 3
the main new weapon at the time was COMMUNICATION!! incredible but while the french field commanders had still telegraph and telephone, the Germans were using the radios and the new "Enigma" machine!!
Ticonio 3 years ago
The german stratrgi and tehnic is brilient
istoricurazboiului 3 years ago 22
Great, the nazi conquest of france is like a virus, terrific...
HondaRacingDevellopm 3 years ago 2