Nope. They did that to bypass other defenses that the French had. The Maginot Line didn't exist before or during WW1.
Advertisement
by The New California Republic » Wed May 16, 2018 4:10 pm
by Baltenstein » Wed May 16, 2018 4:11 pm
Kathmandue wrote:Yeah, maybe if Belgium wasn't so stingy before the war as to let the French extend the Maginot into the Belgian-German border like intended.
by The South Falls » Wed May 16, 2018 4:11 pm
Thermodolia wrote:The South Falls wrote:If they didn't surrender, they saw what happened to Poland, which didn't surrender past 15 September 1939. It might have happened to them. They didn't want more people to die, so they surrendered.
It wasn’t so much the surrender but the fact that Vichy France was a thing. Nothing would have been said about being a collaborator if Vichy France hadn’t been established
by Berhakonia » Wed May 16, 2018 4:13 pm
by The New California Republic » Wed May 16, 2018 4:14 pm
by Baltenstein » Wed May 16, 2018 4:16 pm
by The South Falls » Wed May 16, 2018 4:16 pm
The New California Republic wrote:Berhakonia wrote:
Westwall did not exist in WW1, Maginot did
Wrong. The construction of the Maginot Line started in 1929...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maginot_LineBuilt 1929–1938
by Berhakonia » Wed May 16, 2018 4:19 pm
The South Falls wrote:The New California Republic wrote:Wrong. The construction of the Maginot Line started in 1929...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maginot_Line
Old, but totally ineffective, when you just go around the Ardennes. I wonder why the French didn't just buckle down, and use some of that military budget to actually extend it into the Ardennes.
by Baltenstein » Wed May 16, 2018 4:20 pm
The South Falls wrote:The New California Republic wrote:Wrong. The construction of the Maginot Line started in 1929...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maginot_Line
Old, but totally ineffective, when you just go around the Ardennes. I wonder why the French didn't just buckle down, and use some of that military budget to actually extend it into the Ardennes.
by Washington Resistance Army » Wed May 16, 2018 4:21 pm
Baltenstein wrote:The South Falls wrote:Old, but totally ineffective, when you just go around the Ardennes. I wonder why the French didn't just buckle down, and use some of that military budget to actually extend it into the Ardennes.
Because building a wall between France and Belgium would have been a dickish move towards the latter, seeing how you generally shouldn't build walls towards friendly countries?
by The New California Republic » Wed May 16, 2018 4:22 pm
The South Falls wrote:Old, but totally ineffective, when you just go around the Ardennes. I wonder why the French didn't just buckle down, and use some of that military budget to actually extend it into the Ardennes.
by Berhakonia » Wed May 16, 2018 4:23 pm
Washington Resistance Army wrote:Baltenstein wrote:
Because building a wall between France and Belgium would have been a dickish move towards the latter, seeing how you generally shouldn't build walls towards friendly countries?
It wouldn't really be that dickish, given what happened a few years earlier in WW1.
by Iastalia » Wed May 16, 2018 4:23 pm
by Novo Razcon » Wed May 16, 2018 4:24 pm
by Baltenstein » Wed May 16, 2018 4:29 pm
Berhakonia wrote:Washington Resistance Army wrote:
It wouldn't really be that dickish, given what happened a few years earlier in WW1.
"Hey Belgium, if Germany invades again, we'll just let them invade you and we'll stay put on our side of the wall."
Obviously it's what the French were thinking, but it would've sounded dickish internationally
by The Huskar Social Union » Wed May 16, 2018 5:01 pm
The South Falls wrote:The New California Republic wrote:Wrong. The construction of the Maginot Line started in 1929...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maginot_Line
Old, but totally ineffective, when you just go around the Ardennes. I wonder why the French didn't just buckle down, and use some of that military budget to actually extend it into the Ardennes.
by Northwest Slobovia » Wed May 16, 2018 5:58 pm
Robert O. Paxton wrote:The tenacious notion that French defeat was mostly a matter of morale and the Third Republic’s decadence has a curious history. It was first proclaimed by Marshal Pétain soon after he took power in July 1940. It was a politically charged message. Pétain was determined to exonerate the generals (except for the republican Gamelin) and to replace the Third Republic with a tradition-oriented authoritarianism. Long after almost everything else associated with the Vichy regime has been ignominiously swept away, Vichy’s interpretation of the defeat of 1940 continues to hold sway.
by Nanatsu no Tsuki » Wed May 16, 2018 6:06 pm
Slava Ukraini
Also: THERNSY!!
Your story isn't over;֍Help save transgender people's lives֍Help for feral cats
Cat with internet access||Supposedly heartless, & a d*ck.||Is maith an t-earra an tsíocháin.||No TGsRIP: Dyakovo & Ashmoria
by Evil Dictators Happyland » Wed May 16, 2018 6:13 pm
by Rio Cana » Wed May 16, 2018 7:00 pm
Fearful of a Civil War inside France, such as was happening inside Spain, France led the major nations to call an arms blockade designed to prevent arms shipments to either side during the Spanish Civil War.
by Sovaal » Wed May 16, 2018 7:46 pm
by Sovaal » Wed May 16, 2018 7:46 pm
Rio Cana wrote:The political instability in France is what caused them to lose. Found out that in the late 1930's France was on the verge of civil war. They were changing PM's frequently. Then foreign elements, the UK., even got involved in french internal matters. You can have the best military but if your leadership is a mess you are going nowhere.Fearful of a Civil War inside France, such as was happening inside Spain, France led the major nations to call an arms blockade designed to prevent arms shipments to either side during the Spanish Civil War.
Got above quote from here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in ... Depression
Read this on France and the Spanish civil war - http://spartacus-educational.com/SPfrance.htm
by Evil Dictators Happyland » Fri May 18, 2018 5:47 am
Sovaal wrote:Rio Cana wrote:The political instability in France is what caused them to lose. Found out that in the late 1930's France was on the verge of civil war. They were changing PM's frequently. Then foreign elements, the UK., even got involved in french internal matters. You can have the best military but if your leadership is a mess you are going nowhere.
Got above quote from here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in ... Depression
Read this on France and the Spanish civil war - http://spartacus-educational.com/SPfrance.htm
Not just that, but the country was still suffering after effects from the last war.
by Sovaal » Fri May 18, 2018 5:54 am
was a line of concrete fortifications, obstacles, and weapon installations built by France in the 1930s to deter invasion by Germany and force them to move around the fortifications.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Australian rePublic, Fartsniffage, High Earth, Kvatchdom, Mieyland, Mofin, The Jamesian Republic, The Two Jerseys
Advertisement