ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa
Churchill wasn't elected in 1940, he was appointed, partially because the other possible choice, Lord Halifax, did not press his case.
Well, there's this
oh so minor problem that people who suggest the Halifax option either don't know of, don't understand, or ignore ...
Halifax could NOT have become Prime Minister as he was a member of the House of Lords ... the Prime Minister
must be a member of the House of Commons.
Finding someone willing to resign their seat and holding a By-Election would have been necessary and that would have been time consuming (if possible at all) and divisive as, another
oh so minor point, Halifax was roundly disliked by Attlee, the Labour leader, with which he would have had to have some positive relationship with under the circumstances ...Churchill, on the other hand, did get on with Attlee.
ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa
Another credible what-if is the failure of the Dunkirk evacuation, which was very likely if the Panzer Halt order had not been confirmed by Hitler.
And, yet again, a widely touted what if that doesn't bear up to even the slightest scrutiny ...
* Firstly, the British forces at Dunkirk only constituted, from memory, 45% of the BEF, the rest fought on (or retreated on) and were eventually evacuated from the Breton ports several weeks later.
* Secondly, 'everyone knows' that Hitler randomly OK'ed the Stop Order because he didn't want to embarrass the Brits and scotch chances of an armistice or other peace deal.
What isn't usually presented by the 'everyone knows' camp are several key facts ...
Hitler was told by the Panzer commanders that their forces were spent ... the traffic accident rate had increased massively as drivers literally fell asleep at the wheel of their vehicles for the simple reason that Uppers will only keep you awake for so long ... they also pointed out that their exhausted units had no infantry or artillery support and their logistical tail and flanks were 'in the air' and, logistics wise, inadequate.
Panzer units punched holes, sometimes, but relied on the Artillery to support their attacks and the infantry to follow on close to protect their read and mop up potential counter attacks. They'd outrun the artillery and infantry.
They believed, and evidently made it forcefully plain, that their exhausted and under-supplied troops would be at high risk if any further advances or attacks were undertaken.
Hitler, rightly, believed them ... he hadn't entirely drunk the whole of the Kool Aid at that point.
ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa
It is possible that Britain may have negotiated a peace with the Axis in 1940, but without that event German defeat became inevitable, especially after the unnecessary DOW against the USA.
There are credible 'what-ifs' for the early war years to avoid stale repetition and this game has the flexibly to allow for them.
Well, there are what-ifs that allow for some different routes, but the ones mentioned are very low order possibilities, more unlikely than possible.
Here's a better one ...
The French High Command (Gamelin) was a moron. He had his HQ in a chateau with NO RADIO ... and which was 75 miles from the nearest radio. Communications delays, and his idiotic refusal to issue anything but general 'Orders of the Day' with no specifics let the Germans get inside the French command cycle.
If Gamelin hadn't been protected by Daladier, and if Weygand (who was only slightly less useless) was out of the picture, then place the French commander in chief somewhere WITH a radio and with the ability to issue up to the minute specific orders ... advantage the Allies.
As it was, one of the severe consequences of Gamelin's incompetence was that the French mobile units were committed piecemeal and, by the time armoured counterattacks were considered, the units needed to mount them had either been mostly or completely destroyed.
DeGaulle managed a half-decent armoured attack with his forces ... if the other armoured units had been massed for co-ordinated counterattacks by someone more competent than Gamelin or Weygand then the German fear that the Battle of France might bog down as in WW1 could well have come true ... or, at least, the conquest of France would have taken many more weeks, perhaps many more months.
Or the real possibility that the French decide to spend money on Armoured, Mechanised and Motorised units instead of the Maginot Line?
Or the likelihood that someone less idiotic than Gamelin might not advance into Belgium at the first attack and leave the army out of position against an attack through the Ardennes?
Or the possibility that the French High Command place the length of the Ardennes as one Army Command rather than splitting it between two, which meant when the Germans attacked at the juncture of the two they had an advantage as a result?
Why is it that only ludicrous pro-German 'what-ifs' are the ones that seem to be proposed?
Phil McGregor
