On June 6th, 1944, allied forces under the flags of Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States landed on Juno, Sword, Gold, Utah, and Omaha beaches in Normandy in the largest landing invasion in history, paving the way for a western front to be opened in Europe during WW2.
Plus it's my birthday today, so I figured I'd ask!
How do you explain the phoney war? that wasn't before hostilities
Wally strategic planning presumed a semi-defensive war fought in Belgium or beyond, Belgium trying to do neutrality and re-enact WW1 fucked this up. the Saar offensive (and all other possible offensives on the french border) a) butted into the German defenses--hard fighting b) dislodged troops from a position of strength on the Maginot.
off of the franco-german border, the Wallys were perfectly prepared to engage the Axis, the naval war was hot, and a naval blockade was initiated. the blockade especially indicates Wally intentions, you'd hardly expect a germany cut off from the rest of the world to invade the USSR and win
Pretty strange to enact a blockade without also attacking, almost like they didn't really want to prosecute a war with Germany, at least not until they outlived their usefulness of destroying the USSR.
a naval blockade is attackin. the phoney war period is also when most of the german surface fleet got sunk.
also just before the Battle of France the French & British deployed in Norway, boots-on-the-ground fighting, thousands of allied casualties
They had troops on the border already and Norway isn't even on the mainland, a total free hand in the East
there was a limited amount of wallied troops. most had to be on the belgian border to counter the main expected thrust of the germans,
the troops 'available' on the border were the garrison of the lynchpin of allied strategy--the maginot line. you get them killed on the siegfried line you risk the germans being able to penetrate the maginot.
there's no denying wallied strategy was conservative in this theatre, even arguably cowardly. but its explicable without resorting to a secret and self-destructive bias toward the nazis
First they sign the Munich agreement, then their strategy is very conservative, or even cowardly, to the point that historians call the period the phoney war, then when the war was really on they choose to fight on a different continent or an island in the med until the USSR made the outcome a fait accompli.
that's pretty unfair for 1941, the British, after losing most their best equipment & a bunch of troops in France, were totally on their back foot but dug in their feet and kept the pressure on. If they wanted the Nazis to be successful against the Soviets would they have continued blockading the continent? Continued destroying Axis naval power? Destroyed whatever proportion of the Luftwaffe they did in the Channel? Make an agreement with the Soviets to not conclude separate peace with Germany?
That agreement wouldn't matter if the Germans succeeded
"just concluding a military alliance with someone i want to lose the war"
are you taking the piss? you dont seem very willing to consider my points
i have been enjoying carrying on in a days old thread tho lol :mao-wave: