Naval History Forums

Today it is seventy years since this great offensive started......

A masterstroke. One of Germany's greatest victories...
Who woudl have thought?

But an incomplete victory - Britain itself couldn't be invaded. Knocking out France simply was not enough.

The only bltzkrieg that was followed through to absolute victory was the Polish campaign. All the following blitzkriegs weren't followed through to absolute victory, with the result that Germany lost the war....

The invasion of France was a complete victory, IMO.
Indeed, the following necessary steps for wining the war weren't taken, for a variety of reasons (some of them logical, some not).

But focusing on 10th of May, I'd say the German army accomplished the most important feat of the war (access to French industry and strategic resources, availability of landing strips close to British soil, access to North Atlantic harbors, etc, etc.)

RF wrote:Today it is seventy years since this great offensive started......

And now it is seventy one........

Since the 1870 von Moltke's (the elder) action in the Franco-Prussian war the May 10th 1940's one was (and it still is) the most daring and perfect military invasion ever performed up to date (even more than Desert Storm in the means that the 1991 operation failed to finish Saddam and a new operation was required in 2003). It can be regarded as classical and academic.

Absolutely.

Karl Heidenreich wrote:Since the 1870 von Moltke's (the elder) action in the Franco-Prussian war the May 10th 1940's one was (and it still is) the most daring and perfect military invasion ever performed up to date (even more than Desert Storm in the means that the 1991 operation failed to finish Saddam and a new operation was required in 2003). It can be regarded as classical and academic.

..... The "failure" of the 1991 operation to remove Hussein and the Ba'athists from power in Iraq was not a failure; it was a promise given by the US to the Saudis (and probably the other Arab states) in return for their support and cooperation.

B

Was it more daring than Overlord? Or more perfect than Soviet invasion of Manchuria? How about the Falklands? Or even the North Korean invasion of South Korea? Indeed I'd call the invasion of the Soviet Union more daring although not more successful although if you looked at ground gained perahps even there it would qualify.

Karl Heidenreich wrote:Since the 1870 von Moltke's (the elder) action in the Franco-Prussian war the May 10th 1940's one was (and it still is) the most daring and perfect military invasion ever performed up to date (even more than Desert Storm in the means that the 1991 operation failed to finish Saddam and a new operation was required in 2003). It can be regarded as classical and academic.

The objective of Desert Storm was to Kick the Iraqis out of Kuwait. It accomplished that objective. There was never any intention to go to Bagdad.

On the other hand, the Germans failed to stop the British army from escaping across the channel.

You can nit pick any successful operation if you have an axe to grind.

Byron Angel wrote:

Karl Heidenreich wrote:.....even more than Desert Storm in the means that the 1991 operation failed to finish Saddam and a new operation was required in 2003)......

..... The "failure" of the 1991 operation to remove Hussein and the Ba'athists from power in Iraq was not a failure; it was a promise given by the US to the Saudis (and probably the other Arab states) in return for their support and cooperation.

B

It was a failure because Saddam Hussein remained in power. It took another war to remove him... thirteen years later.

Bgile wrote: The objective of Desert Storm was to Kick the Iraqis out of Kuwait. It accomplished that objective. There was never any intention to go to Bagdad.

A limited war and half a victory. They should have gone right into Iraq and finished the job.

It mean't fighting the war again at great cost to the taxpayer - and in lives.

Bgile wrote: On the other hand, the Germans failed to stop the British army from escaping across the channel.

That is true. But the premise was the invasion of France only, concluding in the Armistice of 22 June 1940.

That was a limited premise, as obviously the operation failed to finish the war. Or prevent the Resistance and the Free French from continuing the war.

RF wrote:

Byron Angel wrote:

Karl Heidenreich wrote:.....even more than Desert Storm in the means that the 1991 operation failed to finish Saddam and a new operation was required in 2003)......

..... The "failure" of the 1991 operation to remove Hussein and the Ba'athists from power in Iraq was not a failure; it was a promise given by the US to the Saudis (and probably the other Arab states) in return for their support and cooperation.
B

It was a failure because Saddam Hussein remained in power. It took another war to remove him... thirteen years later.

By that logic the German invasion of France failed since it didn't knock Britain out of the war.

RF wrote:

Bgile wrote: On the other hand, the Germans failed to stop the British army from escaping across the channel.

That is true. But the premise was the invasion of France only, concluding in the Armistice of 22 June 1940.

That was a limited premise, as obviously the operation failed to finish the war. Or prevent the Resistance and the Free French from continuing the war.

Exactly. And the purpose of Desert Storm was to eject the Iraqis from Kuwait.