Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "The Armchair Historian" channel.

  1.  @ArjayMartin  Seriously, if you must post large chunks from wikipedia, at least take the reference numbers to other books out! Have you read Buchanan? I did, around ten years ago. The most notable thing about him is his failure to refer to any primary sources, and to use what I will generously refer to as 'half truths.' As to this ' In Buchanan's view, the "final offer" made by the German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop to the British Ambassador Sir Neville Henderson on the night of August 30, 1939 was not a ploy, as many historians argued, but a genuine German offer to avoid the war.' There was a much easier way to have avoided the Anglo-French declaration of war on 3 September, 1939, which was for Germany not to have invaded Poland on 1 September, 1939. Have you not considered that?
    1
  2.  @ArjayMartin  No, I really don't. The action against the French Fleet took place on 3 July, 1940. The Vichy government was not established until 10 July, 1940.
    1
  3.  @ArjayMartin  What is that meant to mean?
    1
  4.  @ArjayMartin  Are you really so clueless that you think the Vichy French & the Free French were the same thing? The armistice was signed on 22 June, but the Vichy government was not established until 10 July. The Free French were those who rejected the armistice, and chose to continue fighting in exile. Did you really not know that? Astonishing!!! The British government did not demand that the French navy break the Armistice (not the Peace Treaty, as there was no 'Peace Treaty') but presented a number of alternatives which would prevent the French fleet subsequently joining the war on the German side. One of these was to send the fleet to the French West Indies, possibly to be supervised by the United States. There was nothing in the armistice to prevent this, by the way. The French admiral at Mers el Kebir, for reasons which he never explained, chose not to inform his superiors of the full text of the British ultimatum.
    1
  5. Just a pity they played fast and loose with many of the facts.
    1
  6. No. The decision to halt the armour was made by von Rundstedt, in order to prepare for the second stage of the campaign, and to avoid the risk of another 'Miracle of the Marne.' Goering had already told Hitler that the Luftwaffe could deal with the Dunkirk pocket, and Hitler believed him. Hitler doesn't see to have considered appearing bloodthirsty as much of a problem.
    1
  7. Do you really believe that there would have been massed support in the west for an attack on the Soviet Union?
    1
  8.  @Bakasta170  It seems that you can only answer me by putting words into my mouth. The British officer who exceeded his authority at Amritsar was removed from his position, sent home to Britain, and never held command again. The Japanese behaviour in Nanking was in obedience to orders from their commanders. Are you so prejudiced that you cannot grasp the difference? I presume that there wasn't 'discrimination' in India between different Indian groups in society? Were you actually to read about the administrative structure of the Raj, you would learn that a tiny number of British civil servants were actually present in India. India was administered almost entirely by Indians, and the vast majority of Indians probably never even saw a white face. In point of fact, the initial acceptance in Britain that India should receive independence pre-dated WW2. The difficulty was working out the details, especially when people like Jinnah were determined to establish a Moslem state independent of India. Perhaps you know what actually happened during Partition? It is fascinating how, as events recede into history, the facts become distorted and two dimensional.
    1
  9. You mean by fighting briefly for their own territory?
    1
  10. Why?
    1
  11.  @TheSupart91  Was Montgomery 'bailed out' at Alam Halfa, 2nd Alamein, or Mareth by American forces? Indeed, at Kasserine, British 1st Army troops, although not under Montgomery's command, were needed to 'bail out' inexperienced US forces. If 'Market Garden' was idiotic, then how would you assess the Hurtgen Forest? Or Clark's diversion to Rome in June 1944? What significant battles did Patton actually win? He was not particularly highly rated by his peers. I assume you haven't read Bradley's opinions about Patton's antics on Sicily, by the way?
    1
  12.  @tot0m  One third of the men evacuated from Dunkirk were French. I wonder what you would have had the ten divisions of the BEF do after over 100 Belgian & French divisions collapsed?
    1
  13.  @tot0m  'This counter attack was a trick to cover their flee.' On 21 May? Don't talk such nonsense.
    1
  14.  @tot0m  Didn't France have an air force in 1940?
    1
  15.  @tot0m  I don't need to look at something as generalised as the posts on the internet, as my specialised area of study at university dealt with this period in detail, and also gave me access to many primary sources. However, if you really want to know the facts about the events of that time, I suggest you read Martin Gilbert - Winston S. Churchill Finest Hour, 1939 -1941 (1983).
    1
  16.  @tot0m  Please don't rant. It is so undignified. Before you condemn Gilbert out of hand, you really should try reading him. Where narrow minded nationalism is concerned, I really am not in your league. Perhaps you could tell me exactly what in any of my posts has been 'invented?'
    1
  17.  @tot0m  'You seems to deny that French, Belgian and British officer were in very bad terms on may/june 1940.' When have I ever expressed such a view? 'You seems to deny that British command didn't trust French army were able to perform, so they preferred to flee without referring to french command, and make french and belgian armies in worse position to defend.' When have I ever expressed such a view? Moreover, when, historically, did this happen? When Belgium capitulated, the British 3rd Division was obliged to plug a 20 mile gap between the BEF and French forces by conducting a 25 mile night march of 13000 men, which they did on 27/28 May, in order to link up with French forces at Nieuport. Was that fleeing without telling the French? 'You seems to deny that french troops and french officiers mostly wanted to try to defend while british troops and officers mostly abandonned their lines, or doesnt wanted to concert with french command.' When have I said that? 'You seems to be trash against french command who asked for more help.' I have simply stated what actually happened. I don't think anything in my earlier comment can be regarded as 'trashing.' 'On what purpose ? You didn't even gave fact, you just deny facts without proof. So that I bet you maybe english patriot, keen on propaganda and myth about glorious british army.' You facts seem to consist of vague nonsense such as claiming that the British ran away, or were willing to fight to the last Frenchman, or abandoned their allies at Dunkirk. None of these 'facts' of yours have any connection with what actually happened. Where I have made counter-arguments, I have provided supporting evidence. Comments about what 'The British' thought (or, despite your claims, actually didn't think) in the 1920s & 1930s are irrelevant. In March, 1933, Churchill said in Parliament : "there are a good many people who have said to themselves, as I have been saying for several years: “Thank God for the French Army”. 'And so do the British, they doesnt wanted any casualties to defend french soil anymore like in ww1.' Of course they didn't, but they were willing to send a 'Reconstituted BEF' under Alan Brooke, to Cherbourg, and were willing to continue the fight, until General Weygand told him that the French army was no longer able to provide organised resistance. By the way, there were 78000 British troops killed, wounded, or captured during the campaign in France, excluding losses among naval personnel. What was that about fighting to the last Frenchman again? Seriously, if you aren't able to post credible arguments, supported by evidence, but insist instead on chanting outdated nationalistic prejudices, then why do you bother?
    1
  18. 120,000 French troops were evacuated from Dunkirk. Almost all aboard British ships.
    1
  19.  @adelaidesngan604  As a famous tennis player was wont to shout 'YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!!' I have the Naval Staff History of Operation Dynamo. It lists every ship which took part, British, French, Belgian, Norwegian, Dutch, & Polish, from cruisers to lifeboats, together with ther number of men carried by each. The actual numbers are as follows :- British :- 764. French :- 119. Belgian :- 45. Polish :- 1. Dutch :- 1. Norwegian :- 1.
    1
  20.  @adelaidesngan604  Nonsense. 14 French destroyers and torpedo boats evacuated 6646 men, 5 despatch vessels 1000, 2 minesweepers 2038, 5 submarine chasers 203, 13 minesweeping trawlers 2665, 7 patrol vessels 2501, 12 cargo ships 2290, 59 trawlers 4814. Total :- 22157. British ships :- 1 cruiser 1856, 41 destroyers 96197, 6 corvettes 1100, 1 sloop 436, 2 gunboats 3512, 36 minesweepers 46434, 52 trawlers 5396, 61 drifters 12370, 3 AA paddle steamers 4408, 7 MGBs 79, 6 MTBs 20, 3 armed boarding vessels 4848, 40 coasters 22698, 26 yachts 4681, 45 personnel ships 87810, 8 hospital ships 3006, 12 naval motor boats 96, 40 tugs 3164, 13 landing craft 118, 8 motor launches 579, 8 dockyard lighters 418, 7 hopper barges 2166, 8 auxiliary barges 1256, 25 sailing barges 886, 19 life boats 323, 202 'little ships' 5031. Total :- 312668. Out of interest, one British destroyer, HMS Malcolm, carried only 795 less men than 14 French destroyers and torpedo boats. Your post rather suggests that you don't even know what the role of the Little Ships even was. Sorry, mon vieux, but you are outclassed. Perhaps you should go away?
    1
  21. The Auk has received a raw deal from history, largely because Montgomery didn't like him. That said, why should a commander be criticised for building up a superiority in numbers, equipment, and supplies, before commencing a battle. Ever heard of the phrase 'steel not blood?'
    1
  22. However, the Germans made no use of their occupation of Crete, and never undertook any large scale paratroop operations again.
    1
  23. Yes. Just don't believe that it is accurate, as many wrongly do.
    1
  24. I suppose you really believe that Irving is right, and every other historian wrong? Oh well, no accounting for foolishness.
    1
  25.  @Niko132  Nonsense. Irving's book about Dresden used just two tainted & prejudiced sources, and was later totally debunked by a detailed German study. Irving certainly did use the archives, but in a very selective manner. There are certainly a number of fools around, however. Most of them are unquestioning fans of Irving.
    1
  26. Presumably. Pyrrhus of Epirus would have agreed with you, after the Battles of Heraclea & Asculum.
    1
  27. Really? Which? By the way, didn't the Germans bomb Spanish towns during the civil war, Warsaw on 1 September, 1939, & Rotterdam on 14 May, 1940?
    1
  28.  @loganplank504  Try again. Of course they did.
    1
  29.  @loganplank504  But you have neither tried again, nor even responded to my original post. It really isn't good enough, old chap.
    1
  30.  @loganplank504  Why is it 'not true' that 9 months before August 1940 is November 1939? Is the calendar different on the planet you obviously inhabit?
    1
  31. There were very few captured British tanks re-used in France. A small number of Matilda IIs were used in North Africa, but these were vehicles captured or abandoned in the theatre. I have seen a photo. of a Matilda chassis fitted with a German 37mm AA gun in France, but that is about all.
    1
  32.  @youraveragescotsman7119  I wish I could find the photo. It looked like a fairly basic conversion, in that the origin turret had been removed, and a 37mm gun, with shield, had been mounted instead. As so few of the BEF's Matilda IIs were captured in working order, it was probably a local field modification by someone with time on his hands!
    1
  33.  @youraveragescotsman7119  Found it! Look up 'World War II Warphotos - Matilda II' My memory was playing me tricks, however. It seems to have been a 50mm AT gun.
    1
  34. What makes you believe that a Britain with an army would be more likely to negotiate than a Britain with 300,000 men in German POW camps?
    1
  35. You think that the arrival of the BEF back from Dunkirk 'demoralised' people in Britain? Oh, dear! Incidentally, they weren't 'let go.'
    1
  36.  @carlosespecial269  It wasn't up to the military to make political judgments. von Rundstedt stopped his tanks when he did to prepare them for the next stage of the conquest of France. Hitler agreed because Goering had convinced him that the Luftwaffe alone could destroy the Dunkirk pocket.
    1
  37.  @carlosespecial269  The decision to allow the troops in the Dunkirk pocket would have been a political one. Which, of course, is why no decision was ever made by anyone to 'allow' the British & French to escape.
    1
  38. Hitler didn't 'allow' the troops in the Dunkirk pocket (1/3rd of whom were French, by the way) to escape because the halt order was issued by von Rundstedt. The next phase of the invasion of France was about to begin, and the German armour needed to rest and to service their vehicles. Certainly, Hitler could have countermanded the order, but didn't, firstly because of his WW1 experience, which led him to believe that the Dunkirk area was unsuitable for tanks, and secondly because he had been assured by Goering that the destruction of the Dunkirk pocket and the evacuation fleet was 'a special job for the Luftwaffe.' Seriously, if Hitler wanted to force the British government into an armistice, wouldn't he have been in a better position with the BEF in prison camps, than with it safely on the other side of the Channel, protected by the Royal Navy? As to Hitler not wanting to go to war with Britain, actually it was more a case of not being able to wage war effectively against Britain, because the Germans, with a tiny navy and an air force untrained in anti-shipping techniques, had no realistic means of bringing such a war to a successful conclusion by getting their army across the Channel.
    1
  39. I assume these '12 peace attempts' are fully documented, and you can provide a credible source?
    1
  40. The French fleet was scuttled in November, 1942, when the outcome of the war was becoming obvious.
    1
  41.  @dimitrioskantakouzinos8590  You miss the point. When the fleet was scuttled at Toulouse, the outcome of the war was hardly in doubt.
    1
  42.  @dimitrioskantakouzinos8590  Why wasn't it a good point?
    1
  43.  @dimitrioskantakouzinos8590  You have a short term memory? I am sorry for you. Incidentally, whilst Petain didn't join the war, the Vichy regime happily sent French Jews to German gas chambers, and French citizens to work as slave labour in Germany. I suspect Vichy wanted to run with the Hare and hunt with the Hounds. Print this off then you won't forget it, perhaps?
    1
  44. Very Good. Except of course for the fact that the mines were to be placed in the Rhine at STRASBOURG. Read about Operation Royal Marine before making so ill-informed a comment.
    1
  45. Just a small point. If the British retreated without warning and left the Belgian army surrounded, how is it that the British 3rd Division had to undertake a difficult night march to plug a hole in the left flank after the Belgian capitulation?
    1
  46. My father's Regiment was at le Paradis, fortunately before he joined it. Have you heard of how fair the nice Germans were at le Paradis?
    1
  47. I wonder if those who talk about the importance of the Suez Canal would care to comment on the fact that British convoys didn't actually use it, but used the longer but safer round the Cape route instead?
    1
  48. I assume Operation Compass doesn't come into this category?
    1
  49. Well, how would General Marshall's alternative, of attempting an invasion of France in 1943, have ended? If American troops were to see action in the west in 1943, let alone 1942, where would you have suggested they be deployed?
    1
  50. And what benefit did it bring to the Axis cause?
    1