Why did Hitler let the English escape at Dunkirk? Was it really

it was cause of muh fog

>>2309098
Why do you think Hitler let the English "escape" at Dunkirk, instead of failing to destroy the pocket?

>>2309109
Because the Panzers just stayed still for 4 days after brushing their way through France. Unless there was some sort of natural barrier that made they stop it seems rather deliberate

>>2309121
Or perhaps the Germans soldiers were in no shape to attack a well defended town after spending the last 4 days running and fighting in northern France while preventing the French from regrouping. They were humans, not robots.

Also they had to wait for logistics to catch up. They attacked as soons as they could and failed to crush the Brits,. That's all.

Who else here HYPE for the movie?

>>2309151
>well defended
>fleeing demoralised infantry with no fortifications
Pick one.

>>2309098

Hitler listened to Goering, who assured him he would destroy the BEF with airpower alone.

>>2309098
>let the English escape
>let

Im sure you think that he "let" the USSR win the war too, right?

>>2309098

The stance of seom historians is' the German planes used there were not accurate enough to hit them, dive bombers are used for stationary targets, in Dunkirk there was no fixed targets for the bombers, everything was mobile.

Also the British had a screen themselves of air cover. The British retreat was just a retreat, the Germans couldn't do any better, they, that is the Germans were already stretched to the nth degree getting as far as they did in the campaign.

> stretched like that ho after I penetrate her with my Blitzkrieg

So I would not say the Germans left them go, they could not do anything about.

>>2309197
That's hardly comparable.
>>2309181
This answer is correct

File: Honourable Wehrmacht.jpg (81KB, 736x755px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 736x755px

>>2309098
There is no honour in gunning down an opponent stranded on the beach. The Wehrmacht and its commanders knew this.

>>2309098
Because he still had the rest of France to deal with. This is only a big deal because Bongs are delusional.

>>2309460
>english run away
>start bombing germany
>america now joins the war and has an airfield (england is america's airstrip)
>germany loses for fighting a war on two fronts

It was a fairly big fuck up

>>2309468
But focusing on Dunkirk would have done fuck all to knock the British out of the war. The question is strictly one of focusing of taking out a few British Divisions fleeing continental europe and leaving their heavy equipment behind, or knocking France out of the war.

>>2309468

Not him but

>BEF destroyed
>Bomb Germany anyway because it turns out 10ish infantry divisions aren't related to your strategic air arm (Yes, I know they didn't call it that back then)
>America likely joins the war anyway.
>Because the loss of the BEF was hardly crippling.

File: 220px-Polish_POWs_shot_by_Wehrmacht_1939.jpg (21KB, 220x249px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 220x249px

>>2309455
>wermacht
>honor
Choose one.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_in_Ciepiel%C3%B3w

>>2309482

In his defense, it's far from clear that even with an extra 3-4 days to reorganize, that France would be able to put up a coherent fight.

>>2309455
deludedwehracuck.jpg

>>2309486
But it wouldn't have been 3-4 days. Crushing the Dunkirk pocket would have required diverting other divisions north, away from Paris, to take part in the fighting, along with a diversion of supplies, etc. And then there would have been, you know, the actually fighting to crush the pocket, which will take an indeterminate amount of time and supplies.

Instead, Hitler chose to take Paris.

>>2309455
lol

>>2309181
this

>>2309455
>2017
>still falling for the "bad SS - good Wermacht" meme designed by Ame4icans after the cold war started, because they needed a west-german army for possible war with soviet-union & its satelites.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht
Is this HISTORY & Humanities board?
I thought this is HISTORY & Humanities board.

>>2309455
lol good one

>>2309098
Because Herman Goering was an autistic manchild

>>2309098
He didn't. The german generals halted the attack so they could regroup and get reinforcements.

File: 4L_nNMAB5Gk.gif (3MB, 640x266px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x266px

>>2309455

This is a contentious thesis - the Germans took massive amounts of supplies, vehicles and weaponry, and hardly considered it a defeat.

The BEF escaped with their bare lives.

>>2309497

It wouldn't have necessitated transferring of divisions. What would needed to have been diverted from other purposes is the limited quantity of logistical support, extra ammunition, reinforcements, fuel, etc. And yes, historically, those supplies were diverted towards pursuing the remnants of the French army (not towards Paris itself, Paris was declared an open city).

Given that the order to halt was on 23rd of May, and the order to resume attacks on the dunkirk pocket happened at 3:30 in the afternoon of the 26th, and that most divisions needed another 16 hours to actually start attacking; 3-4 days seems a reasonable amount, given that you had Army Groups B and about a third of A, a significant chunk of the overall German forces in France, committed to it when they did move to mop up the pocket.

Furthermore, given that the decision would only have to be made after the successful "Sickle Cut", and that Fall Rot began on June 5th anyway, I just don't think that a weeks to months long diversion of forces is reasonable.

>>2309098
They waited because Hitler is dumb, and then they got French'd.

>>2309098
>Why did Hitler let the English escape at Dunkirk?
Didn't have the ball to do it.

>>2309544
> It wouldn't have necessitated transferring of divisions.
How do you know that? How do you know the outcome of this hypothetical battle?

>What would needed to have been diverted from other purposes is the limited quantity of logistical support, extra ammunition, reinforcements, fuel, etc.
Limited how? Theoretically all demands for supplies are limited.

>Given that the order to halt was on 23rd of May, and the order to resume attacks on the dunkirk pocket happened at 3:30 in the afternoon of the 26th, and that most divisions needed another 16 hours to actually start attacking; 3-4 days seems a reasonable amount, given that you had Army Groups B and about a third of A, a significant chunk of the overall German forces in France, committed to it when they did move to mop up the pocket.
But that was with the evacuation underway, and the British actually leaving. (and the Wehrmacht losing 20,000 troops and 100 tanks in the process). To actually prevent an evacuation, and ensure the destruction and capture of the total destruction of 400,000 troops involved will obviously require a greater commitment of force.

>>2309659
>How do you know that? How do you know the outcome of this hypothetical battle?


Because no divisions were transferred out of the Calais enclosure when they halted, nor were any transferred in when they began to attack again. I don't know for certain, but it seems highly unlikely that it would be necessary.

>Limited how? Theoretically all demands for supplies are limited.

There is a limited quantity of transport, as well as supplies. Transport is the more critical bottleneck though.

>But that was with the evacuation underway, and the British actually leaving.

The British only started embarking on their way out on the 27th, after the order had been made to resume attacks; furthermore, you didn't get significant numbers of evacuees until the 29th, when you had about 47,000 people pulled out. The amount of force brought was aimed for smashing the entire trapped pocket, some 400,000 men.

Furthermore, it was mostly the French doing the last ditch fighting around the perimeter, not the British forces evacuating. You can't be both on a perimeter stretching some 12 miles and filing away in harbors ready to climb onto whatever transport is available at the same time. If the attacks start sooner, and those troops are needed to defend themselves, they won't be in a position to evacuate.

1/2

>>2309659


2/2


>To actually prevent an evacuation, and ensure the destruction and capture of the total destruction of 400,000 troops involved will obviously require a greater commitment of force.

No, what they need to do is get firepower in range of the evacuation zones before transport is ready to haul major amounts of them out no the 29th. Historically, the attacks started again on the afternoon of the 27th and had closed the pocket by the end of the 4th; an 8 and a fraction day push. However, the rate of evacuation halved on the 2nd of June, when more pressure was put on the beaches as the Germans closed into range.


Push everything back 4 days, and the Allied situation in Dunkirk is much worse. The Germans will close in before you have more time to get your evacuation fleet together, meaning that crowding at the harbor is much more dangerous as soon as they get their artillery into range. If they're advancing at the same rate they did historically; and they can interfere as much as they did historically from 1st June onwards, you'll be evacuating the first two days more or less as historically done, and get out about 25,000 troops. But then you'll be in the position the British were on in the 2nd much earlier. Suddenly, instead of getting out about 50-60,000 men a day, you're probably getting out 20-30,000. 6 days of that only evacuates about 150,000 men, meaning you're leaving some 57% of your force dead or in a PoW camp. You could try to slow them down by putting everyone on the perimeter, but if they're on the perimeter, they're not evacuating, and that just means that you're staving off the inevitable.


It doesn't require a greater commitment of force. All it requires is an earlier commitment of force; which in turn requires a redirection of limited logistical support away from pursuit elements down near St Quentin and the like and more towards Dunkirk itself.

>>2309739
>>2309740
All of this assumes that everything will proceed exactly the same while the Germans behave differently. If you push more on the beaches, more of the British troops fight instead of try to evacuate, etc. and the battle becomes an unknown quantity again.

>You could try to slow them down by putting everyone on the perimeter, but if they're on the perimeter, they're not evacuating, and that just means that you're staving off the inevitable.
But that's exactly what needs to be certain won't happen: a staving off. If the Germans are staved off, even for a few days, that's men, material and resources being commited to the Dunkirk pocket instead of the fall of France.

>All it requires is an earlier commitment of force; which in turn requires a redirection of limited logistical support away from pursuit elements down near St Quentin and the like and more towards Dunkirk itself.
Right, and there's still no compelling reason to divert that. France is still more important than a pocket of troops that is self-demobilizing.

>>2309098

Hitler didn't "Let the English escape" at Dunkirk.

Blighty just showed cheeky foreigners what's what yet again, just like when we burned down the White House or sunk the Armada.

Hitler's attempt at a moustache was incredibly feminine btw, why couldn't he grow a proper beard?

>>2309753

>All of this assumes that everything will proceed exactly the same while the Germans behave differently.

I was under the impression we were discussing the probable outcomes of the Germans shifting support to efforts to close the Dunkirk pocket rather than press on more to the south against the falling back French.

>If you push more on the beaches, more of the British troops fight instead of try to evacuate, etc. and the battle becomes an unknown quantity again.

If the British troops try to fight instead of evacuate, the question becomes when they all die or are captured, not if. 400,000 men don't beat 800,000 men who have greater air and artillery advantages.

>But that's exactly what needs to be certain won't happen: a staving off. If the Germans are staved off, even for a few days, that's men, material and resources being commited to the Dunkirk pocket instead of the fall of France.

They weren't committed to Fall Rot anyway. The only "loss" to the Germans, insofar as pressing their attack against France, is how the supplies that historically were diverted to forces like the 2nd and 9th armies would instead be going to the 4th and 6th.

And it wasn't like the Germans weren't attempting to rest and refit both forces at once. The Dunkirk group only stopped for about 3 and a half days before resuming attacks. Why do you think the rest of the army would do so much worse?

>Right, and there's still no compelling reason to divert that. France is still more important than a pocket of troops that is self-demobilizing.

Unless of course, you think that France can't recover anyway. By the time Fall Rot hits, they're down to 68 divisions, a pathetically thin line to try to cover a front that stretches from Abbeville to Montmedey just on the main, largely unfortified front alone. You will, of course, have to leave a few of them guarding the Maginot line forts and something in the Alps to prevent the Italians from just walking across the border.

>>2309177
>fighting rear actions do not exist
>an entire army group or expeditionary force can be in engaged in EITHER fighting OR retreat but it's impossible to do both!

You sound retarded

>>2309753
>If you push more on the beaches, more of the British troops fight instead of try to evacuate, etc. and the battle becomes an unknown quantity again.

What's important is that they can't evacuate which they have to because they're holding an untenable position. If they're forced to battle they're bound to lose in the end which is why the British were so keen on trying to get out asap.

Not the person you were replying to btw.

>>2309455
this, hitler could've easily killed them all

File: unnamed.jpg (95KB, 1028x925px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1028x925px

>>2309788
>Hitler's attempt at a moustache was incredibly feminine btw, why couldn't he grow a proper beard?
His mustache was the common mustache grown by german ww1 soldiers so they could fit on their gas masks and still have facial hair. it was to commemorate ww1 veterans, that's how good of a guy hitler was.

FYI to answer OP, Hitler could've totally slaughtered or taken prisoner all of the soldiers of Dunkirk, but as he had shown multiple times before, he wanted no conflict with the British. So after sitting for 4 days, the British shamefully retreated after their catastrophic defeat, and the lying British press had the balls to claim "British forces at Dunkirk slip under Germany's nose" LMAO.

File: 1477279967621.jpg (18KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 600x600px

>>2309870

>>2309788
>>2309870

It was a fucking Charlie Chaplain mustache. It has nothing to do with femininity or WW1 gas masks.

Well those French human shields have something to do with the evacuation. And then the British had the guts to call this the miracle of Dunkirk.

Also they bombed the French fleet with no remorse.
And finally this De Gaulle puppet was comfy in the islands calling for the suicide of the remnants of the French army.

Seriously, the French would have been better off negotiating with Hitler.

>>2309886
totes lol
>british out tricked hitler XDDD
>he waited too long and the british escape was genius XDDDD
it was one of the most pathetic incidents of the history of modern warfare, lmao. but history is written by the victors.

>>2309098
everyone was super tired by that point-- the panzer crews in particular had been juiced to the limit on meth chocolate

it was just need for sleep, really

File: 1461598233493.jpg (247KB, 1224x1445px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1224x1445px

>>2309898

>>2309455
muhhonor.jpeg

>>2309890

Then why did he let other men do him in the bum?

>>2309455
goddamn polfags

>>2309455
>wehrmacht
>honor
Anon, I...

>>2309098
Because Hitler expected that the Brits would agree to favorable peace terms after their defeat in France, but knew that this would be politically impossible if he massacred their fleeing soldiers.

Of course, it turned out that the Eternal Anglo would never accept peace anyway, but Hitler didn't know that at the time.

>>2310074
He was gay (and that is ok)

Because while the Brits were fleeing, the Germans attacking Dunkirk were breaking their teeth on the French defenses.

>>2309098
>english

>>2310323
nah, Hitler really had no idea what the heck he was doing. He kept thinking that German forces were going to get flanked throughout the whole invasion of France and had to be talked out of stopping the German progress over ghost units.

>>2309484
poles aren't human so it's okay

File: 415312cd-3202-45ec-b83d-3e48ecbf14aa.jpg (55KB, 300x409px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 300x409px

They were afraid of Jean-Paul Belmondo?

Because Hitler was actually the good guy.

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XExjrZxTdk

>>2311840
I bet you call the bombing of Dresden a war crime lmao

>>2311882
This documentary is so full of shit.
>tfw I watched almost half of it a couple of years ago and couldn't believe that someone actually put effort into this

cuz french tanks still existed in the thousands at their flank xd

They took an outnumbered battle and were cucked out of a decisive victory.

>>2309484
>BELIEVING THE HOLOCAUST HAPPENED
LOL

From what I've heard off Battlefield it was because he shat himself because "things couldn't possibly be going well for me, must be some trap or something"

>>2309098


Because he was an incompetent fuckup from start to finish and German successes in the war were in spite of him

>>2309895

>no remorse
>this is what frog fuckers actually believe

It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German enemy. We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany. Should we conquer we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe. In these circumstances, His Majesty's Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers el Kebir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives;

(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans.

(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment.

If either of these courses is adopted by you we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation if they are damaged meanwhile.

(c) Alternatively if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans lest they break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews to some French port in the West Indies — Martinique for instance – where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.

If you refuse these fair offers, I must with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.

Finally, failing the above, I have the orders from His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships from falling into German hands.