Tank Battle of Annie. Surrender of belgium

Tank Battle of Annie. Surrender of belgium

German soldiers under cover of Panzerjager I anti-tank self-propelled guns, who came under fire on the road between Annu and Murdorp


Blitzkrieg in the West. The first operation took place during the Belgian operation tank battle of World War II - Battle of Annu. Göpner’s motorized corps defeated Priu’s cavalry (tank) corps.

Defense breakthrough


The Anglo-French command acted as Hitler and his generals demanded. Sent towards the Germans the French and British armies. The allies allied with the Belgians and began to deploy along the boundaries of rivers and canals from Antwerp to Namur. It seemed that the enemy would be stopped, perhaps, and chased (in the north, the allies at first exceeded the Germans). But the Germans acted faster than the allies expected. The French and British sometimes did not even have time to get to the intended positions or gain a foothold on them. German mobile units quickly went forward, overturning the enemy in oncoming battles. In the Ardennes, where a strong blow was not expected, the allies themselves weakened the position of the transfer of additional forces and weapons to the northern sectors of the defense. Ardennes shooters, as they could, restrained the enemy, destroyed and mined roads, arranged blockages of stones and logs. However, German sappers quickly cleared the roads, and German divisions crossed the Ardennes and cut through the defenses of the 9th and 2nd French armies.

The Luftwaffe inflicted a series of attacks on the airfields of Belgium, in the first days they destroyed a significant part of the Belgian Air Force and gained air supremacy. The 6th Army of Reichenau immediately forced the southern part of the Albert Canal (capture of Eben-Enamel). Belgian troops, hiding behind the destruction of communications and rearguards, on the night of May 11 to 12 retreated to the border of the river. Deal. The Belgians left the fortified area of ​​Liège without a fight in order to avoid encirclement. The rapid fall of the first line of defense of the Belgian army stunned the allies. They believed that the Belgians themselves would hold out for up to two weeks, while the Anglo-French troops would gain a foothold on the Dil line and tighten the rear. On May 12, the Belgian king Leopold III (he was the commander in chief of the Belgian army) held a military meeting with the French Prime Minister Daladier, the Allied Command. It was decided that the Belgians would take responsibility for the Dil line from Antwerp to Louvain (Leuven), and the ally for the northern and southern flanks.

The French 7th Army covered the northern coastal flank, on May 11, advanced units reached the city of Breda in the Netherlands. However, the Germans had already captured the crossing at Murdeyk, south of Rotterdam, preventing the enemy from uniting with the Dutch. And the Dutch army retreated to Rotterdam and Amsterdam. The French did not dare to launch a counterattack and began to retreat to Antwerp; German aviation struck at the columns of the enemy.


The battle in the central part of the country. Breakthrough of German mobile connections


The decisive battle in central Belgium took place in the Annu - Gembloux area. In this direction, a mobile unit of the 6th Army — the 16th motorized corps under the command of Erich Göpner (3rd and 4th Panzer Divisions) —was advancing. The German divisions were armed with over 620 vehicles, but most of the tanks were T-1 and T-2 models with weak weapons and armor, and there were also a significant number of commander tanks (armed with machine guns). The 1st French army, which went into the Gembloux-Namur region, had a cavalry corps of General Rene Priou, which was similar to the German mobile units and consisted of the 2nd and 3rd light mechanized divisions. The tank units included 176 Somua S35 medium tanks and 239 light Hotchkiss H35 tanks. French tanks were superior to German in terms of armor and firepower. Also, the French cavalry corps was armed with a significant number of light tanks AMR 35, armed with a 13,2 mm machine gun, they were equal to the German T-1 and T-2 or even surpassed them. Dozens of Panar-178 reconnaissance armored vehicles armed with 25-mm cannons posed an even greater threat to German tanks.

Two panzer divisions of the German 6th Army marched north of Liège and reached the Namur region, where they encountered French tanks. On May 12, 1940, the first tank battle of the Second World War took place - the Battle of Annu. The Germans were inferior in armament and armor. However, they had an advantage in tactics: they combined tanks and other branches of the army, actively used radio, which made it possible to react more flexibly to the situation during the battle. The French used linear tactics inherited from the First World War. French tanks did not have a radio. At first, the Germans took over and blocked several French battalions. But then the French threw the main forces into battle and released their advanced units. The Germans were defeated and forced to yield. Large losses were in light tanks T-1 and T-2. All French guns (from 25 mm) pierced the T-1. T-2s kept up better (they were additionally armored after the Polish campaign), but also suffered high losses.


German anti-aircraft gunners visiting the French tank AMR 35 ZT 1 from the 2nd mechanized division, lined in Belgium


French machine gun reconnaissance light tanks AMR 35 abandoned on the road in Belgium


1935 French reconnaissance armored car AMD 35 from the 2nd mechanized division, abandoned on the coastal highway near the Belgian town of Le Panne.

On May 13, the Germans took revenge. The French were killed by bad tactics. They arranged their forces linearly, without reserves in depth. The 3rd Belgian corps, which retreated through the location of the Priu cavalry corps, offered support, but the French unreasonably refused. The Nazis concentrated their forces against the 3rd mechanized division of the enemy and broke through its defense. The French had no reserves in the rear, and they could not straighten the situation with counterattacks. They retreated. In the battles of May 12–13, the French lost 105 vehicles, and the Germans 160. But the battlefield remained with the Germans, and they were able to repair most of the damaged vehicles. Göpner's corps pursued the enemy until Gembloux. The French suffered serious losses. At the same time, the German Air Force actively bombarded the French tank divisions. There, the French had already equipped anti-tank positions and on May 14 at the battle of Gembloux repelled an enemy attack. Meanwhile, the Germans broke through the enemy’s defenses near Sedan, and Priu’s mobile corps left their positions at Gembloux. On May 15, the 1st French Army began to retreat due to the failures of the Allies on other sectors of the front.

As a result, on May 13, the Germans overturned two mechanized enemy divisions. The French were driven back to the river Dil. May 14, the advanced units of the German army reached the river. Deal. After the surrender of Holland on May 14, 1940, the troops of the 18th German army were transferred to the northern border of Belgium, which strengthened the position of the 6th army. Meanwhile, the forces of the 4th German Army broke through the position of the Belgian army and reached the Meuse south of Namur. The 12th Army and Kleist’s Panzer Group also successfully advanced. On the first day, the Germans marched through Luxembourg, broke into the defenses on the Belgian border, on the second day they discarded the French trying to counterattack, on the third day they forced the Belgian-French border and occupied Sedan. On May 15, the Nazis defeated units of the 9th French Army between Namur and Sedan.

In the areas of Sedan and Dinan, the Germans overcame the Meuse. Tank formations of the 4th German army, knocking down the resistance of the French, advanced on Cambrai. Kleist’s shock tank group (5 tank and 3 motorized divisions - 1200 tanks), crossing the Ardennes, which were considered almost insurmountable by the Allies, crossed the Meuse, crossed Northern France and were on the coast on May 20. As a result, the German army groups “A” and “B”, with a huge half-ring, pressed the northern group of Anglo-Franco-Belgian troops to the sea.


Hotchkiss H35 from the 1st French light mechanized division


French heavy tank Char B1, lined in Belgium


Burnt armored car AMD-35. France. May 1940


Padded Belgian light tank AMC 35 during the battle of Antwerp, May 19, 1940

Retreat to the coast


The breakthrough of the German divisions into northern France and further to the English Channel made the defense of central Belgium meaningless. The Wehrmacht now circumvented the southern flank of the Belgian Allied group. The Allies began a retreat to the river. Senna (left tributary of the river Dil) and further to the river. Dandr and Scheldt. At the same time, there were no strong fortifications on Scheldt, and strong resistance could not be rendered there. The Belgians did not want to take the line p. Dil and his capital Brussels. However, on May 15-16, the French 1st Army and the British began to withdraw, so the Belgians also had to leave their defensive line "Dil" (KV line). In the southern section, Belgian troops left the Namur region.

In the northern sector, the Belgians, along with the 7th French Army and the British, held the HF line for some time. Then the French retreated to Antwerp and further, to the aid of the 1st Army. When the French left, 4 Belgian infantry divisions remained in front of the 3 infantry divisions of the German 18th Army. On May 16, the Belgians began to leave the fortified area of ​​Antwerp. On May 18-19, the Germans took Antwerp.

On May 16-17, 1940, the British and French retreated beyond the Brussels-Scheldt Canal. Belgian troops withdrew to Ghent beyond the river. Dandr and Scheldt. On May 17, the Germans occupied Brussels, the Belgian government was evacuated to Ostend. After capturing the Belgian capital, the 3rd and 4th Panzer Divisions were transferred to Army Group A. In the Belgian direction, the Germans left one mobile unit in the 18th Army - the 9th Panzer Division. Allied forces at this time turned into a disorganized mass. The prospect of a breakthrough of German tanks to Arras and Calais demoralized the French.

The Allied Command was in dismay. The British were inclined to the idea of ​​evacuating from the mainland. The commander of the British expeditionary army, John Vereker (Lord Gort), saw that the French had no clear plan, no strategic reserves. The French armies in Belgium turned into unorganized crowds and were unable to break through the encirclement. In France, there are also no serious reserves for the deblockade of the Belgian army group. Therefore, we must move to Ostend, Bruges or Dunkirk. The High Command demanded a breakthrough to the southwest, “no matter what difficulties”, in order to reach the main French forces in the south. At the same time, the British decided that part of the troops would still need to be evacuated by sea, and began collecting ships.

May 20, it became known that the Germans went to sea and the troops in Belgium were cut off. Lord Gort informed the arriving head of the British General Staff Ironside that a breakthrough to the southwest is impossible. Most of the British divisions were already on Scheldt, their regrouping meant the collapse of the general defense with the Belgians and the death of the expeditionary forces. In addition, the troops were exhausted by marches and battles, their morale fell, the ammunition was running out. The Belgian High Command reported that no breakthrough was possible. The Belgian troops have no tanks and planes, and they can only defend themselves. Also, the Belgian king said that on the territory remaining under the control of the Allies, provisions were only enough for 2 weeks. Leopold proposed creating a fortified bridgehead in the area of ​​Dunkirk and Belgian ports. In such a situation, a counterattack to the southwest was suicide. Everyone was waiting for the ring of encirclement to break through the French troops on the river. Somme. Under pressure from Ironside on May 21, the British army launched a limited counterattack on Arras. At first, the British achieved tactical success, but could not get further.


A column of Wehrmacht anti-tank battalion equipment on Liège Street. In the center of the photo is the Krupp Protze tractor unit with a 37 mm PaK-35/36 anti-tank gun


The surrendered Belgian soldiers leave Fort Bonsel (fort of Liege fortified area)


German soldiers are photographed on the captured French tank Char B1-bis. During the exit from the battle on May 15, 1940, in the area of ​​the Belgian town of Flavien, the car in reverse moved into a hole from which it could not get out. The crew left the tank and was captured. Vehicle from the 1st Panzer Division


German soldiers stand in front of the Palace of Justice in the occupied capital of Belgium - Brussels. In the foreground is a monument to the infantry soldiers of the Belgian army who fought during the First World War. May 18, 1940


German soldiers eat ice cream at Le Petit-Château castle in Brussels

Last fights


The French were unable to organize a successful offensive on the Somme. The British, disillusioned with the allies, decided that it was time to save their troops. The French and British retreated west to Dunkirk, the Belgian army covering the eastern flank. The Belgians took the line on the river. Fox On May 22, the position of the troops was visited by the new British Prime Minister W. Churchill. He believed that the British and French, with the support of the Belgian cavalry corps, should make a breakthrough to the south-west, in the direction of Bapom and Cambrai, and the remaining Belgian troops - to withdraw to the river. Iser. This significantly reduced the front of the Belgian army. However, the Belgians had to leave Pashendale, Ypres and Ostend, almost the entire country. In addition, withdrawal without air cover led to heavy losses.

On May 23, the French attacked the Germans again, but without success. Belgian troops under the pressure of the enemy left Terneuzen and Ghent. The Belgians left most of the country, were driven back to the coastal areas, where there was no large industry and defensive lines. There were no sources of supply. The troops lacked ammunition, fuel and supplies. The air was dominated by German aircraft. On top of that, masses of refugees crowded in the last patch of Belgian territory.

Winston Churchill and the new French Commander-in-Chief Maxim Weygand, who took command from Gamelin, insisted on a breakthrough. However, the British were afraid to drop positions only on the Belgians, who were supposed to cover the breakthrough of the Allies. The stretching of the Belgian troops could cause their rapid defeat, a blow to the rear of the allies striking a counterattack and the fall of ports. That is, it could lead to the complete defeat of the allied group. May 24, German troops broke through the defenses of the Belgians on the river. Fox and captured the bridgehead. The German Luftwaffe inflicted heavy blows on the Belgian army, almost the entire artillery park was defeated.

On May 25, the Germans crossed the Scheldt and practically separated the Belgian and British forces. The position of the allies was catastrophic. Management was broken, communication was interrupted, the German Air Force dominated the air. Allied aviation was practically inactive. The troops mingled with huge crowds of refugees. Some units still tried to counterattack, others held the defense, while others ran in panic to the ports. The Allied Command was unable to organize strong counterattacks from the south and north to release the group in Flanders and Northern France. The British, in fact abandoning their positions and allies, began a retreat to the sea to begin the evacuation. On May 26, the Dunkirk operation to evacuate the British army began.


Czech-made German light tank Pz.Kpfw.38 (t) from the 7th Panzer Division lost a caterpillar while trying to overcome a two-level transport interchange destroyed by the Belgians


German motorcyclists on the street of the ruined Belgian town of Dinan


French machine-gun reconnaissance light tank AMR 35 abandoned on May 29, 1940 on the street of the Belgian town of Vernet

Surrender


The situation for the Belgians was hopeless. On May 25–26, 1940, the Germans occupied Boulogne and Calais. On the morning of May 27, German troops reached Dunkirk and could fire at it. On May 26, the Belgian army left the line on the Fox, on the eastern flank of the Nazis reached Brugge. The Belgians tried to organize a defense in the Ypres area. The British sought to keep the last hope for evacuation - Dunkirk, and began to retreat to the port. Thus, the British exposed the northeastern flank of the French army in the region of Lille. As the British retreated, the Germans advanced and surrounded most of the French army.

The Belgian command was not even warned of the evacuation of the British. In the battles of May 26–27, the Belgian army was practically defeated. By May 27, the Belgian army was pressed to the sea in the Ypres-Bruges area, on a site 50 km wide, covering the allies from the east. The Germans broke through the defense in the central section. Ostend and Bruges were on the verge of falling. The Belgians did not have the opportunity to independently stay on the coast. They had no hope for the evacuation and help of the allies. Belgian King Leopold III was offered to flee, to abandon his subjects, as did the Norwegian king and the Dutch queen. But he fell into prostration, decided that the cause of the Allies was lost. The king did not want to be an exile and sit in England. Deciding that further resistance was pointless, Leopold sent a parliamentarian to the Germans in the evening of May 27 and signed the surrender at 23:28. On May 550, the Belgian XNUMXth army laid down weapon.

Losses of the Belgian army: over 6,5 thousand killed and missing, more than 15 thousand wounded. Losses show that although the Belgian amia was in close contact with the Germans for almost the entire campaign, the hostilities were not of high intensity most of the time. Only at the turn of the river. Scheldt and r. Fox activity has increased. The rest of the time, the Belgians mostly retreated. Here, the Belgians were under pressure from the enemy and suffered significant losses at the junction with the British army.

London and Paris accused the Belgians of betrayal. The head of the Belgian government, Hubert Count Pierlo refused to accept surrender, led the government in exile, first in Paris, then in London. The Belgian counties of Eupen, Malmedy and Saint-Vit were annexed to the Reich. In Belgium entrusted indemnity of 73 billion Belgian francs. The country was under German occupation until the fall of 1944.


The entry of German troops in Brussels


German soldiers lay down Belgian weapons in Bruges after surrender


During Operation Dynamo (the evacuation of Anglo-French troops from Dunkirk to England), the destroyer Burrask on May 29, 1940, was blown up by a mine in the region of Ostend (Belgium) and sank the next day
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

147 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67 1 June 2020 05: 28 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The German light tank Pz.Kpfw. 38 (t) of Czech production from the 7th Panzer Division lost the track
    It’s impossible to see the lost track, but the actions of the crew and the position of the tank show more that the tank ran over the bottom of something and lost mobility
    1. Free wind 1 June 2020 07: 35 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Goose in place, behind the tailbone of the right tanker, a fragment is visible. There is either a deer fur. Either the side or the box is jammed.
    2. Civil 1 June 2020 10: 58 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      The loss of command of the troops among the allies, they also happened in their 41 years ...
    3. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 16: 22 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Yes, what a caterpillar is there ..... Here is another perspective - they are trying to stretch the "four" with two tanks, I think:
      1. Catfish 1 June 2020 18: 13 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Ek managed to move him out. Even on the basis of my distant tanking past, I can imagine how much the mechanic took for the collar. laughing

        And in fact, and in another case. drinks
        1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 18: 36 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          come on you)
          7th TD - “ghost division”, “fast-track” mode) The mechvodka fell asleep at the levers) I forgot the chocolate bar with Pervitin for energy to eat ... laughing
          1. Catfish 1 June 2020 18: 58 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            There is such a thing as interchangeability. For example, as a tank commander, on the march, I simply must change the tired mechvod, it is the commander's duty to drive a car no worse than a mechanic. And in our regiment we also taught gunners how to drive, although the charter did not require this. I once during a training exercise, after a three-hour march, replacing the mechvoda, I slept on the go under the cannon (T-54) for a couple of hours and didn’t even wake up from firing from it. So the Germans also had tanks to drive freshly.
  2. Catfish 1 June 2020 05: 45 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    It is interesting what the soldiers from the Luftwaffe do in a tank in such a clean and ironed shape. Photo for memory?

    Well, this car is at least remotely similar to a tank, but due to a misunderstanding, German T-I tankettes were called a tank, it is not clear. A rotating tower as a sign of a tank? But other? Not a war but a disgrace to all of Europe, with the exception of the Germans, of course.
    1. Evdokim 1 June 2020 06: 24 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Quote: Sea Cat
      Not a war but a disgrace to all of Europe

      The crown of all this action is the operation Dynamo. One name for this British drape is worth it. Prodinamili so prodinamili.
    2. svp67 1 June 2020 07: 37 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Sea Cat
      It is interesting what the soldiers from the Luftwaffe do in a tank in such a clean and ironed shape.

      Actually, they have the same anti-aircraft gunners for the “Luftwaffe” and we do not know the date when this shot was taken
      1. Catfish 1 June 2020 14: 21 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        I know that anti-aircraft gunners belonged to the Luftwaffe, like parachutists (except for the SS), they differed only in the color of their buttonholes, which is impossible to see on a black and white photograph. That's why I wrote - the Luftwaffe, without going into details.
    3. Free wind 1 June 2020 07: 51 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      And why there is no Wehrmacht eagle, on the right side of the chest. Bronik AMD-35, of course not bad cars, it would be useful in the household. The war is on, and ice cream is being sold here, most likely a cafe somewhere nearby, on the street at a tables drinking cocoa with croissants. But what kind of animal is in the foreground, his ass can be seen with a blanket. If the soldiers are sitting, then this is a pony, a pony is shaggy. And the horses are smooth animals. Well, let there be a sloppy circus horse, some kind of colored blanket.
      1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 10: 50 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Quote: Free Wind
        And why there is no Wehrmacht eagle


        not necessarily on a flying jacket. And not the Wehrmacht’s eagle then, but the Luftwaffe’s eagle) This Unterfeldfebel on the left side, in theory, should have a qualification mark.
        1. Catfish 1 June 2020 14: 56 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          It’s hard to say that for the rank, the epaulettes seem to be generally smooth, the unter on the collar under the buttonholes should have a chevron, but it doesn’t. But the “candidate for pilots” also has two birds in a buttonhole, but another shoulder strap and a collar without a chevron. Fuck knows, there only with corporal everything is clear enough.
          1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 16: 05 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            But the "candidate for pilots" also has two birds in a loop


            corporal. Buttonhole green (well, if you can judge by b / w))), without corner, empty shoulder strap. The one on the tank has a corporal chevron on his sleeve. It seems so.
      2. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 11: 14 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: Free Wind
        And why there is no Wehrmacht eagle


        an eagle on a winged jacket was obligatory for the flight crew. For anti-aircraft gunners introduced by order No. 1290 of 01.10.1940/XNUMX/XNUMX.
      3. Senior seaman 1 June 2020 11: 20 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        But what kind of animal is in the foreground, his ass can be seen with a blanket.

        Maybe a donkey. There are such shaggy :)
      4. Catfish 1 June 2020 14: 24 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And why there is no Wehrmacht eagle, on the right side of the chest.

        This is not the Wehrmacht, this is the Luftwaffe, but the eagle was eaten for breakfast, because they did not bring porridge. laughing
    4. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 10: 14 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      Quote: Sea Cat
      what the soldiers of the Luftwaffe do on the tank


      maybe anti-aircraft gunners? )))

      they had practically no air targets, and such paper wedges were certainly tough on a 20mm flask)
      1. Catfish 1 June 2020 14: 59 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Yeah, just like the German T-I and T-II of this same "paper wedge", that's it and pushed those, and others there, in general, not weakly.
    5. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 12: 31 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Quote: Sea Cat
      but due to a misunderstanding, the German wedges T-I called the tank, it is not clear.


      so it seems at first it was called MG PzW - machine gun armored car.

      Quote: Sea Cat
      Well, this car is even remotely like a tank


      and how, in fact, are the AMR 35 and PzKpfW I so different ??
      1. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 03 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        ... and how, in fact, the AMR 35 and PzKpfW I are so different

        Caliber main caliber, sorry for the tautology. hi
        1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 15: 35 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          well, one hotchkiss 13mm - this, of course, is not two MG13s of 7.9mm each ..... but also not 20mm for the PzKpfW II
          ))
          1. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 52 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            So not about the "deuce" speech. request smile
    6. hohol95 1 June 2020 13: 05 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      But it doesn’t float like the "tanks for the English Channel" T-37/38 ...
      1. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 02 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Come on, Alexey, they’ll drown safely. Not for them the water area. laughing
        1. hohol95 1 June 2020 16: 16 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          And Mr. Dean Suvouroff wrote that it’s all to eat “super-duper Stalin’s tanks”! Who were supposed to conquer the usu Europe for the "bloody Bolsheviks"!
          1. Catfish 1 June 2020 16: 46 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Well, Mr. Suvorov can write whatever he wants, and a machine-gun platform sole without a walkie-talkie will remain a platform sole, even if it is three times floating. laughing
    7. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 41 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      In fact, a rotating turret with two machine guns is a sign of a tank. In any case, the machine is more understandable than the early Matilda with 78 mm armor and one machine gun of 7,7 mm caliber.
      There is nothing shameful either in the battle near Ann - Gembloux, or in the battles near Dunkirk. According to the Compiegne truce, the questions are for politicians, not military ones. And so, if the four armies do not have a single command, then a different outcome is difficult to expect. If the tanks are distributed in a thin layer along the entire front, this is also a hint of hint. And finally, if there are three people in the tank, one of them is in the tower and the reaper and the Swiss and the player is in the dude, but there is no walkie-talkie, then this is not funny. But about the war.
  3. Olgovich 1 June 2020 06: 21 New
    • 7
    • 10
    -3
    And after all, the Allies exceeded the Nazis in everything.

    Let them have tactics, communication, but there was no fierce resistance either: the Allies retreated at the slightest pressure.
    There was no desire to fight, there was a desire to survive at all costs ...
    The Luftwaffe inflicted a series of attacks on the airfields of Belgium, in the first days they destroyed a significant part of the Belgian Air Force and gained air supremacy.

    . The French were killed by bad tactics. They arranged their forces linearly, without reserves in depth.


    Has anyone drawn conclusions from this? Alas...
    1. konchitawurst 1 June 2020 07: 05 New
      • 5
      • 4
      +1
      Draw conclusions, Stalin was personally interested in the reasons for this outcome of the events. There were changes, but there was little time left.
    2. strannik1985 1 June 2020 09: 25 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      And after all, the Allies exceeded the Nazis in everything.

      Divisional artillery DLM - 24 75-mm guns, 12 105-mm howitzers, 8 47-mm anti-aircraft guns, 6 25-mm air defense.
      They surpassed them in tanks (like a spacecraft, partly in the summer of 1941), organization didn’t, strategy didn’t (in a normal situation, as in 1914, there is a struggle for initiative, both sides are attacking / trying to attack, and then there’s a “fake war”).

      Has anyone drawn conclusions from this? Alas...

      They did, from June 1940, the Soviet BTV made a huge step in development, huge, but not enough.
    3. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 11: 25 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Olgovich
      There was no desire to fight, there was a desire to survive at all costs ...


      After the meat grinders of the first war, the French and British had a persistent phobia.
      1. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 11 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        But what about the Germans? Something no phobia is even visible under a microscope. The difference in mentality? Everything is clear with the French, as someone said about them: “First surrender at the front, then in bed.” With the British a little bit wrong, on land they never really knew how to fight, and at sea they competed competently, stubbornly and bravely. Remember how their auxiliary cruisers, sacrificing themselves, covered the convoys from German cruisers and battleships.
        1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 13 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          The French did not capitulate at the front. They fought well, as the article shows, until their leadership "leaked" the country. And even then there was a truce, not capitulation. The British also fought at Dunkirk bravely and competently.
          In general, the 1940 campaign in Europe is no different from the battles of June - July in 1941. The Germans, fighting against the French and others, lost every tenth killed and wounded, and the French captured only 350000 in the battles, many of them were wounded, and the rest only after the start of negotiations. The same with the English: while they ordered to fight, they fought, when they ordered to evacuate, they ... continued to fight, and even went to bayonets not without success.
          1. Dr. Frankenstucker 2 June 2020 10: 30 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            and I don’t allow myself swagger in relation to ordinary poals and tommies - we are talking about the higher echelons. The lion's share of comments under articles on the Polish, Norwegian and French campaigns are written in the spirit of "pissed off ... capitulators ... whether it’s our grandfathers !!!" You quite rightly drew a parallel between May 40th and summer 41st. If, say, the State Archive is to be believed, then from 22.06 to the end of the 41st NKVD officers detained more than 700 thousand deserters.
            1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 16: 48 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Something like that. May 1940 and June 1941 look like two pictures in which to find some differences. Moreover, in a tank that has one loader for two guns, somehow fighting the wrong
            2. saigon Today, 13: 26 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Каждый четвертый погибший француз был офицером .
          2. Catfish 2 June 2020 14: 31 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            You've probably messed up sites; they don’t deal with alternative history here. Wrong address. repeat
            1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 16: 36 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Yes, this is just the usual story, and the same as that of the author of the starter topic.
    4. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 02 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      The desire of the Allies to survive at all costs in the above battles is somehow imperceptible. The Germans did not notice him either. But they noticed French officers who shot pistols in that battle on German tanks. So there was fierce resistance under Annie, when the French did not retreat under not the slightest pressure, and under Gembloux. Two weeks later, in bayonet battles near Dunkirk, too, the desire to fight was not in doubt.
      1. Olgovich 2 June 2020 11: 10 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
        The desire of the Allies to survive at all costs in the above battles is somehow imperceptible.

        read the article- on the capture of fortified borders and capitals and states-a matter of hours-a-day
        Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
        But they noticed French officers who shot pistols in that battle on German tanks.

        what?
        Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
        so what fierce resistance under Annus was when the French did not retreat under not the slightest pressure, and under the Gembloux.

        And how did they end up in the dunkirk? request
        Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
        Two weeks later, in bayonet battles near Dunkirk, too, the desire to fight was not in doubt.

        Are you tens of thousands of prisoners?
        1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 13: 13 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          1. In a matter of hours, but actually not one day, the Germans took the capitals of Belgium and the Netherlands. And in the case of Brussels, this is not a watch, or even a day.
          2. And that. Jump out of your burning tank and shoot German tanks with a pistol, this hardly speaks bad of the French military. However, one German officer also climbed a French tank in this battle, but fell under a caterpillar.
          3. And the Germans ended up in Dunkirk on the 26th day of the campaign, and not so much from Annu - Gembloux (this is the Namur region, if that), but rather as a result of a breakthrough of the poorly protected front near Sedan and access to the sea at the mouth of the Somme. True, the Germans took ten days to go the last 23 km to Dunkirk. Moreover, the main forces of the Anglo-French at the time of the start of the battle for Dunkirk were in Valenciennes, Lille, Armantiere, Bethune and other places known to us by the “Three Musketeers”.
          4. Tens of thousands of prisoners were formed when, during the evacuation, they stupidly did not take the rear guard: one day was not enough. And among these tens of thousands, some of the previous days went to bayonets (the last counterattack was on June 3), some were wounded, and some were rear and chauffeurs.
          1. Olgovich 2 June 2020 15: 27 New
            • 2
            • 4
            -2
            Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
            In a matter of hours, and in fact a day, and not alone, the Germans took the capitals of Belgium and the Netherlands. And in the case of Brussels it’s not a watch or even a day.
            True: Brussels did not defend a minute at all!
            Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
            Jump out of your burning tank and shoot German tanks with a pistol, this hardly speaks bad of the French military.

            does not say anything. Generally
            Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
            And the Germans ended up in Dunkirk on the 26th day of the campaign, and even not so much from Annu - Gembloux (

            In the so-called "battle" under Anna, for as much ... for 3 whole days, the Germans lost as much .... 60 people, killed, 20 people a day!
            You can lose more on maneuvers ...
            Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
            And the Germans ended up in Dunkirk on the 26th day of the campaign, and it’s not so much from Annu - Gembloux as a result of a breakthrough of a poorly protected front near Sedan and access to the sea at the mouth of the Somme. True, the Germans took ten days to go the last 23 km to Dunkirk. Moreover, the main forces of the Anglo-French in May

            Germans walked to dunkirk 13 days .. And this is after all the "fierce" "battles" and "bayonet" attacks of the allies against the weakest protagonist ...
            Shame .......
            Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
            Tens of thousands of prisoners were formed when during the evacuation they stupidly did not take the rear guard: one day was not enough. And among these tens of thousands, part of the previous days wentand bayonet (the last counterattack was on June 3), some were wounded, and some were rear and chauffeurs.

            1 French, 500 Belgians, 000 Dutch who surrendered, also went to bayonets and were injured?
            1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 16: 27 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              1. Dunkirk, the Belgian command deliberately left. Again, mainly due to a breakthrough near Sedan.
              2. For a tank battle, the numbers are normal: you can even jump out of a burning tank. And the tanks were shot down as many as 164 pieces. Under the Prokhorovka, the Germans had less return.
              3. The Germans walked to Dunkirk for 26 days, for they entered it on the morning of May 4. Moreover, it took them 24 days to overcome the last 9 km. And yes, reflecting bayonet-style attacks without quotes.
              4. Of the French, 1150000 soldiers and officers surrendered to Marshal Petain and his entourage.
              The remaining 350000 were captured during 40 days of fighting, and yes, among them a significant proportion were wounded. A rearguard forgotten on the shore in Dunkirk (although those whose retreat he covered were fighting with bayonets), and surrounded by Lille whom the Germans allowed to parade, and the garrisons of Boulogne and Calais.
              1. Olgovich 3 June 2020 09: 20 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
                1. Dunkirk, the Belgian command deliberately left. Again, mainly due to a breakthrough near Sedan.

                And?
                Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
                For a tank battle, the numbers are normal: even from a burning tank you can jump out. And the tanks were shot down as many as 164 pieces. Under the Prokhorovka, the Germans had less return.

                LOSSES are FUNNY!
                Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
                . Of the French, 1150000 soldiers and officers surrendered Captured Marshal Petain and his entourage.

                Are they rams?

                And the rest, except for the petan, generals, politicians, officers, etc., WHERE?
                Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
                for they entered into it on the morning of May 4.

                Nonsense.
                Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
                The Germans walked to Dunkirk for 26 days,

                13
                Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
                The remaining 350000 were captured in 40 days of fighting,

                fights in its territory.
                German prisoners-ZERO.

                compared? AND?
                1. Sergey Eremin_2 3 June 2020 12: 28 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  This is not bullshit, buddy Bittner.
                  1. Losses at Annie are not funny. Especially for the Germans and especially in proportion to the number of tanks participating in the battle. And yes, the Germans irrevocability near Prokhorovka is really ridiculous (it is irrevocability).
                  2. No. They are soldiers and officers. The Japanese in 1945 surrendered by order of the emperor, even the kamikaze. And besides Petain, there were de Gaulle, Count de Leclerc (breaking out of the encirclement near Lille) de Lattre de Tassigny, Pierre Koenig, Giraud (escaped from captivity).
                  3. The Germans walked to Dunkirk for 26 days: from May 10 to the morning of June 4. What about arithmetic? I recall in May 31 days. For 14 (and not 13 days) the Germans reached the English Channel at Gravelin (halfway from Calais to Dunkirk). To overcome the remaining 24 km, the Germans took another 12 days.
                  4. The fighting is largely in the Benelux. They themselves also captured prisoners (as was already surrounded by a group near Lille), but according to the Compiegne Armistice they were immediately released. So we compare the sides of the winner and the loser.
                  5. However, during the time that the Germans traveled from Luxembourg to Dunkirk, and then from Dunkirk to Cherbourg, the next year they seized territory from Ostroleka to Yelny and from Neman to Luga. And there were more than 350000 prisoners in the Border battles alone.
      2. Catfish 2 June 2020 16: 50 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        German tanks were fired from pistols.

        That's right! good The French invented the most effective way to deal with German tanks. You still remember the bike about the Poles "with sabers head against the tanks." laughing
        1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 17: 06 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Well, the Germans appreciated this method positively (like the equestrian attack of the Poles near Kroyants). A German, climbing a French tank and tearing under the tracks, is an adequate response to firing at tanks from a pistol.
          1. Catfish 2 June 2020 17: 10 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            German under the tracks of a French tank? Is it from the same opera as pistol shooting at a tank?
            1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 17: 15 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Moreover, both were in direct connection. By the way, counterattacks of the French cavalry in May 1940 were also.
              1. Catfish 2 June 2020 17: 44 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                If you remembered the Poles, then they did not attack the tanks, but the infantry on vacation. The German equipment was in the woods, and when the crews of the Betaers recovered, took their places and left for an open place, they simply mowed out the cavalry with machine guns. And this duck with the attack "saber against the tank" was launched, if I am not mistaken, by an American journalist, and everything went for a walk around the wide world, and still everything is walking.
                1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 17: 48 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  Correctly. But the heroism of the Poles under Kroyants and, especially, the French under Anna - Gembloux does not cancel this. By the way, the Poles attacked the infantry successfully, and the main losses of the Poles on this day were not at all from the fire of the Betaers.
                  1. Catfish 2 June 2020 18: 42 New
                    • 3
                    • 1
                    +2
                    ... the main losses of the Poles on this day are not at all from the fire of the Betaers.

                    Yes? Were there German tanks?
                    1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 18: 54 New
                      • 5
                      • 0
                      +5
                      No. But the battle went on all day and lacked the usual rifleman. And so, the Polish squadron carried out a successful attack, which did not last so long.
                      1. IPC 245 4 June 2020 19: 31 New
                        • 8
                        • 0
                        +8
                        The Belgians did not have a chance a priori, it’s like buttered with a jerboa with a bear ...
  4. Korsar4 1 June 2020 06: 36 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    So-so choice: to escape, abandoning subjects or surrender.
    1. Viktor Sergeev 1 June 2020 08: 58 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      The third choice: to fight to the end and die heroically, did not occur to you?
      1. Korsar4 1 June 2020 09: 21 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        “The vanquished is always wrong - there is no one to justify him” (c).
      2. Kronos 1 June 2020 12: 44 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        When it makes sense yes, but when everything is lost no
      3. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 03 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        In fact, the Anglo-French fought to the end. Until they received an order from the command.
        1. Viktor Sergeev 2 June 2020 08: 33 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Well, how did you fight? Strayed together and waited for the change, probably this is such a method of warfare.
          1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 12: 55 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            At the cashier in the grocery store, they were waiting for change in a kilometer queue. But the cashier from the meat department shouted through the whole store: "Galya! Don’t knock out sausage for two twenty!"
            In other places, waiting for change is impossible.
            Normally they fought, even the SS men backtracked several times. They never received an order to surrender either to Annie-Gembloux or to Dunkirk, and the Compiegne truce was a bit later.
            1. Dr. Frankenstucker 2 June 2020 18: 00 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Quote: Sergey Eremin_2
              even the SS men backtracked several times.


              yes, the “dead head” pretty panicked when it saw a dozen of its burning “fours” and “triples” at Varlus.
              1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 18: 02 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Well, the “Dead Head” at that time was not able to repel tank attacks. Still at the forefront of a weekless year.
    2. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 13 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      There was a third option, though not very pleasant: put a bullet in your forehead.
      1. Korsar4 1 June 2020 16: 43 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        And the known truths are revealed: there is no freedom. And "woe to the vanquished."
        1. Catfish 1 June 2020 16: 49 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Hello, Sergey! hi Well, they consider “chickens in the fall,” and “autumn” was sad for the Germans. True, the Belgians, coupled with the French, have almost nothing to do with it. request
          1. Korsar4 1 June 2020 16: 56 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            The classics are already from Keitel: “What, and France defeated us?”.
            And so, everything turns out sooner or later. Until the next shock.
            1. Catfish 1 June 2020 18: 19 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              I didn’t understand the meaning of the word “getting smoothed out,” seriously, I didn’t understand. request
              And regarding Keitel’s expression (?), The comment is slightly lower.
              1. Korsar4 1 June 2020 18: 32 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                From geology or soil science, the term. How alignment can be interpreted.

                In a figurative sense - everything after shocks leads to a more even perception.

                But let the philologists explain this.
                1. Catfish 1 June 2020 18: 52 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  Everything is very clear. But, I think somehow not everyone. I will not go into details, frankly, already tired.
                  1. Korsar4 1 June 2020 18: 55 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    What are you tired of?

                    I want to express quite accurately what is in my head. Sometimes, maybe not entirely successful.
                    1. Catfish 1 June 2020 19: 00 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      Tired of all the arguments about "rewriting history" with subsequent abuse and unsubstantiated allegations about the Second World War.
          2. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 04 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Moreover. The French fought to the headwaters of the Danube, the Belgians (in the ranks of the British) to Lubeck. and yes, France is one of the victorious powers.
            1. Catfish 2 June 2020 14: 41 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              The French reached the headwaters of the Danube

              Without a map with the designation of units, this statement is not worth a penny.
              As for the Belgians, the Czechoslovak battalion (later the corps) was part of our army, so what? They too?
              France is one of the victorious powers.

              For political reasons only. The contribution of the French to the “common piggy bank” was negligible, the same Poles did much more in the Kosciuszko division and in Andres’s army, however, no one had ever classified Poland as the victorious powers.
              Politics...
              1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 16: 35 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                In fact, Poland is also one of the victorious powers. Another thing is that France is also a great power. But France, both in fact and not for political reasons, de Gaulle did not ask for any consent, but on the contrary, put the Americans before the fact, including the liberation of Paris by the hands of the French themselves.
                The contribution of the Poles was significant, but no less than the contribution of the French, starting in North Africa. Specifically, in the last 11 months of the war during the liberation of France, Benelux and in the battles in Germany, the French lost fewer amers or shaves, but more Canadians or the same Poles of Maciek, although nothing good can be said about them.
                And as many cards as you like, starting with the Brezhnev 12-volume. In any district library. It shows the progress of 1 French army. The tenth volume is taken and studied.
                And yes, Czechs, too. Moreover, they fought normally.
  5. Thanks to the author for a little-known fact. It was interesting to read.
    1. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 14 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Colleague, what fact do you mean? hi
      1. For me, the entire European campaign is quite uninteresting - the consequences of neglecting the teaching of history at one time. I did not know about significant tank clashes in it.
        1. Catfish 1 June 2020 17: 18 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Clearly, I also studied in Soviet times. smile
  6. Quadro 1 June 2020 07: 37 New
    • 11
    • 2
    +9
    550 thousand soldiers and 6.5 thousand losses - surrender. All this fuss in Europe is even funny. And they say something about containing Russia there.
    1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 05 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Well, they successfully restrained the USSR two months before. One of the reasons for stopping the Soviet offensive on Helsinki was the possibility of transferring the Anglo-French corps to Finland.
      1. strannik1985 2 June 2020 11: 21 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Well, they successfully restrained the USSR two months before.

        Is this reason even in some Soviet documents?
    2. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 06 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, there were slightly more soldiers and losses, but there was no surrender. It was the Compiegne truce, mirrored by the ceasefire of the same name in 1918.
  7. polar fox 1 June 2020 07: 59 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    and yet, why didn’t the Germans smash the Angles to dust and let them calmly evacuate? Was there an agreement?
    1. qQQQ 1 June 2020 09: 06 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Quote: polar fox
      and yet, why didn’t the Germans smash the Angles to dust and let them calmly evacuate? Was there an agreement?

      Personally, I think so. The evacuation of troops as a guarantee is not an attack on Britain, in exchange for a truce and freedom of action in the East. In fact, they only got the opportunity to calmly fight the USSR and then until a certain period.
      1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 12: 07 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Quote: qqqq
        in exchange for a truce and freedom of action in the East.


        some kind of strange truce - the three-month battle for Britain. Is it just to take something from the Luftwaffe or something?

        Quote: qqqq
        Evacuation of troops as a guarantee of no attack on Britain


        nonsense. Reverence in Dunkirk with a stop order was an invitation to the negotiations, which the Führer really counted on, but not a "guarantee". In Directive No. 16 on the preparation of an invasion of the Island, he pointed out that England did not show signs of readiness to negotiate, so the metropolis should be eliminated as a basis for continuing the war against the Reich.
        In your opinion, tons of papers of OKV, General Staff, Reichministries and other related authorities - disinfect and existed only in order to hide the "agreement" of Adolf and Winnie ??
        1. qQQQ 1 June 2020 14: 33 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Dr. Frankenstucker
          Reverence in Dunkirk with a stop order was an invitation to the negotiations, which the Führer really counted on, but not a "guarantee".

          I agree with this, the guarantee was too much, but it doesn’t change the essence, Hitler wanted to stop the database at least, didn’t receive it, an attempt to break Britain quickly followed, it didn’t work, in my opinion, the next attempt was made to negotiate (Hess flight), to three years was enough.
      2. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 20 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        The Germans did not smash the Angles to dust because they could not, although they tried. Firstly, the stop order was valid for two days, and it concerned only tanks: German infantry continued to attack. Secondly, Operation Dynamo began an hour after the cancellation of this order. Thirdly, the stop order was just caused by the stubborn resistance of the allies and the loss of 23% of German tanks by the end of May 50. And he gave the order to stop first to Rundstedt, and only then did Hitler confirm it. Nevertheless, the evacuation became possible only due to the stubborn resistance of the Anglo-French troops. Because when the tanks of Guderian were 23 km from Dunkirk, the Anglo-French fought even near Valenciennes, where they were pushed back from Annie Gambloux. Not so fast and retreated.
    2. strannik1985 1 June 2020 09: 16 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      was there an agreement?

      Only if with Rommel and Runstedt, the first, after the attack near Arras, suspended the advance of his 7th Panzer Division until the approach of the "neighbor" (5th TD), and the second - the advance of the tank group.
    3. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 25 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      And this was another "brilliant" idea of ​​Adolf Aloisevich: to let the British go, and then agree with them. It did not work out, Winnipuh announced that Britain would fight to the end "on land, at sea and in the air." They succeeded at sea, but not very much on land.
      1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 16: 14 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: Sea Cat
        but not on land.


        what are you! A very victorious army .... unless, of course, the matter concerned the Germans and Japanese lol

        in Syria, Vishists were noted, Italians in Somalia and Libya, Baghdad was taken from Rashid Ali in Iraq ...
        1. Catfish 1 June 2020 16: 43 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          I can not agree. God didn’t give the Germans his “sea” Rommel, although Doenitz’s wolves nipped the ass of a British lion well. laughing
          1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 17: 04 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            In fairness, with all his talents, Rommel in Africa would have been nothing without intelligence. Thanks to the Italian intelligence who stole the codes from the US Embassy in Rome. The Germans read all the encodings of Comrade Fellers (an American attache to the British headquarters) that he sent from Cairo. Just in front of El Alamein, he was removed to the States when the shavers finally pierced that something was wrong.
            The Kriegsmarine had a mirror situation with Enigma and Blatchley Park, as you know)
            1. Catfish 1 June 2020 17: 17 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Just before El Alamein, they removed him to the States,

              Well, the point, in my opinion, is not so much in this, but in how effectively the British fleet acted in the Mediterranean. Even the fact that it was difficult to scrape together during intense battles on the Eastern Front did not always reach its destination.
              As Rommel wrote to his wife about his production as field marshals: “It would be better if they sent me a couple of tank divisions.” If sent, then no spies would be needed. But, history has no subjunctive mood, that was - that was.
        2. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          So the British and Germans were defeated in November - December 1941 in Cyrenaica. And in the spring of 1942, Rommel and the Italians pulled themselves under the German level.
          1. Catfish 2 June 2020 14: 29 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            So the British and Germans were defeated in November - December 1941 in Cyrenaica

            If possible, specify which Germans the British defeated in Cyrenaica, and who commanded those and others. As far as I remember, before El Alamein, the "African Corps" beat the British, and not vice versa.
            1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 16: 12 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Those who defeated the British six months later, that is, the African Corps with Rommel at the head. Then the British drove him from Cyrenaica right into Tripolitania and released Tobruk, besieged by Rommel in the spring of 1941.
            2. Liam 2 June 2020 17: 38 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              This is not the first time you are trying to swim in the topic of the war in the Mediterranean and North Africa and you are drowning regularly. It is probably worth studying the topic before getting into disputes
          2. Catfish 2 June 2020 17: 06 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            So the British and Germans were defeated in November - December 1941 in Cyrenaica.

            Name at least one battle in which the British defeated the Germans in Cyrenaica. laughing Yes, ok, don’t bother - it wasn’t. I'm already tired of discussing the obvious, happily. hi
            1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 17: 08 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Have you heard about Cruzader?
              1. Catfish 2 June 2020 17: 11 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                If you are talking about a tank, then you have not only heard, but also seen, if about an operation, then, of course, you have read it. And where is the defeat of Rommel? Cite.
                1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 17: 14 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  About the operation, a victory in which destroyed the myth of Rommel's invincibility.
                  1. Catfish 2 June 2020 17: 38 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Nobody destroyed anything, and the British did not have such an operation. Okinleck’s order not to consider Rommel something extra natural in the army, remember? And this was already after the fighting in Cyrenaica.
                    1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 18: 10 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Actually, it was in November - December 1941. The battle was difficult, it was with varying success, but the British won a complete victory.
                      1. Catfish 2 June 2020 18: 41 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        How long after this “victory” did Tobruk fall? And if there was anyone other than Rommel who won, it was the British fleet. Without him, Fox would have strangled the British with what he had, and without any problems.
                      2. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 18: 52 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        At the end of 1941, however, the British won over Rommel. But Tobruk fell six months later, after Rommel’s return victory at the same Gazala. Do not confuse two different battles in Cyrenaica, which in May 1942 Rommel had to recapture. By the way, the first defense of Tobruk (like Dunkirk) in the Red Army was taken as a model for the defense of Odessa and Tallinn.
                      3. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 18: 56 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        In fact, just at the time of Cruzeider, the Italian fleet seized the initiative for once after a successful convoy in Benghazi (which the British soon recaptured as well), the death of the Maltese cruisers and a successful attack against Valiant and Queen Elizabeth.
              2. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 17: 21 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Where? Al-Ghazaly.))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
                1. Catfish 2 June 2020 17: 39 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  And who smashed whom? )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 00)
                  1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 17: 45 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    The British defeated the Germans there. So much so that they not only released Tobruk, but also drove out the African Corps from Cyrenaica)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
                    1. Catfish 2 June 2020 18: 44 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      So crowded out or smashed. What the hell are you writing, and there ... laughing
                    2. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 18: 58 New
                      • 3
                      • 0
                      +3
                      In fact, in order to displace the enemy, it must be defeated. Well, Rommel did not want to be squeezed out, he is not a chemical element. But as a result, the British and Tobruk released and Cyrenaica was recaptured for a while.
                    3. Catfish 2 June 2020 19: 00 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      ... Tobruk was released and Cyrenaica was recaptured for a while.

                      Here, finally. This is the key phrase. It was necessary to start with this, and the rest was verbiage.
                    4. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 19: 01 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      Verbiage is your attempt to deny the victory of the British in late 1941.
                    5. Catfish 2 June 2020 19: 46 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      How can I deny that which was not? laughing
                      Especially for you, a portrait of a genius commander, Viscount Alameinsky and lover of trinkets, filter marshal Monti. soldier

                      He is on the far left; hi
                    6. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 19: 55 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      So the victory of the British was in December 1941. Although the victory of the Viscount El Alamein, which happened, incidentally, even before the start of the counterattack at Stalingrad, is certainly larger. Portrait in australian hat interesting. There are two points: 1. Monti is usually still portrayed in a beret.
                      2. The portrait does not have the Soviet Order of Victory.
                    7. Catfish 2 June 2020 19: 58 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      Well, the Romanian king Mihai Persh was also awarded the Order of Victory. Monty "deserved" him almost exactly the same. request
                    8. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 20: 31 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      Stalin knew whom to reward and for what. Thanks to Mihai I, the Romanian army, still holding Chisinau on August 23, withdrew from the war and turned weapons against Germany. This gave the Red Army the opportunity to quickly slip through both Romania and Bulgaria. The Germans and Hungarians organized defense already at the Carpathian passes.
                    9. Catfish 2 June 2020 20: 35 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      ... the Romanian army ... got out of the war and turned weapons against Germany.

                      Well, that’s especially valuable. laughing
  • Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 01: 23 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    No. It was not a brilliant, but a sensible joint idea of ​​Rundstedt and Aloizych to save the remaining half of the tanks, having squeezed the bridgehead with one infantry. True, the tanks still had to enter the battle.
    1. Catfish 2 June 2020 16: 45 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      And Runstedt ...? What is she "healthy", since I still had to use tanks?
      Well, all right, I actually had the famous “stop order” of Hitler, which allowed the British to save the army and to which von Runstedt had nothing to do. I already wrote about the reasons why this order was given and will not be repeated. Tired of crushing the water in the mortar.
      1. Sergey Eremin_2 2 June 2020 16: 57 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        So I about this stop order and the reasons for its return by Hitler. Initially, the tanks were stopped by Rundstedt (i.e., canceled the attack scheduled for the next day in the evening of May 23). Hitler, who came to the front, supported Rundstedt and confirmed with his order the stop of the tanks. Therefore, within 48 hours, only the infantry attacked the Anglo-Franco-Belgians. All this time, the Allies did not start evacuation, the Dynamo operation began only an hour after the cancellation of the stop order (Brauchitsch, however, tried to cancel it earlier), but Rundstedt referred to the Fuhrer. The reason for the decision of Rundstedt and Hitler is the desire to avoid "grinding off" of tank units in the battles for Dunkirk. Therefore, by May 31, the tanks were again withdrawn from battle and until the evening of June 3, Dunkirk was stormed by the infantry. The rest of the hypothesis of a stop order for conspirators.
  • Operator 1 June 2020 08: 55 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    Of the 550th Belgian army, after "heroic resistance to the invaders", 6,5 thousand died - a purely concrete agreement.
    1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 11: 36 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      according to Overmans, the Belgians on the Eastern Front in the ranks of the Flemish Legion and Langemark died more than in May 1940.
  • Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 10: 54 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Oh, in the end of the article there are not enough codes with a white flag)
    May 28th. The surrender of the Belgian army. The size of the white sheet touches. The Germans, I think, appreciated)))
  • A. Privalov 1 June 2020 11: 49 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    In 2016, I was in Annu passage. Wilderness and province, even by European standards.
    1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 13: 03 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      valuable comment. So what? What should it be?
      1. A. Privalov 1 June 2020 14: 37 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Dr. Frankenstucker
        What should it be?

        Nothing much, but over the past 80 (eighty!) Years, could something have changed in the city, except for the appearance of a new sleeping area?
  • Threaded screw 1 June 2020 13: 01 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4

    Who recognized the future Field Marshal?
    1. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 29 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      But it’s true! But I did not pay attention. Hello dear comrade Rommel. drinks
      1. Threaded screw 1 June 2020 15: 36 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        But it’s true! But I did not pay attention.
        Now there are two of us here! drinks )) This is a German light tank Pz.Kpfw.38 (t) of Czech production from the 7th Panzer Division lost a caterpillar while trying to overcome a transport two-level interchange destroyed by the Belgians. It can be seen how they are preparing to pull it with a cable using another tank. The fox (although he was not yet a fox then) personally arrived to find out the reasons for the delay in the movement of subordinates.
        1. Free wind 1 June 2020 15: 54 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          He did not lose the caterpillar in place. She can be seen on a good monitor, connected to a TV set between two tailbones of a soldier. Rather, the fur of the water ....... request The fur of the waters is in place, otherwise the commander in the tower probably has nothing to do. Although maybe I'm wrong.
          1. Threaded screw 1 June 2020 16: 09 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            I also only suggested, I’m not even sure that this is Belgium, it may already be France. Indirectly, this indicates that the photograph was taken after 26.05.1940, when he was awarded the cross. Given that Brussels merged earlier, a photograph could have been taken in France. In this case, then even the author was mistaken drinks ))
          2. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 16: 28 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            right, wind, right)
        2. Catfish 1 June 2020 15: 58 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          That’s why he took that he got into every little thing, or rather, there were no trifles for him. I read that somehow, when attacking in Africa, flying on the Storha, I noticed a convoy stopping. He ordered the pilot to turn back and threw down a note: "If you do not immediately move forward, I will go down. Rommel." The issue was resolved at that very moment. smile drinks
        3. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 16: 25 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1



          Screw, I'm sorry, but this is garbage about LTshku - everything is fine with her.
          There is a problem with the sliding "four", which is not in the frame.
          Hold for the big picture:
          1. Threaded screw 1 June 2020 16: 26 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Wow, thank you so much, this I have not seen! Is it France or Belgium?
            1. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 16: 30 New
              • 6
              • 1
              +5
              this is the same bridge in Belgium)
              keep Rommel watching towing)
  • BAI
    BAI 1 June 2020 14: 12 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    What roads! We still do not have such.
  • vladcub 1 June 2020 15: 08 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In fact, the Germans “rode out” the best cordinaci and swiftness. Coordination of actions at the front is a great thing. If the old people had better correlation in actions, it is still not a fact that the Germans won.
    Remember, 1941: half of our losses were due to the fact that the command could not establish interaction between parts of its army, and in Belgium 3 different armies operated.
    Later, when our command learned how to interact, the situation began to change.
  • vladcub 1 June 2020 15: 25 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    "actively used the radio" despite the fact that their "panzer" 1 was without walkie-talkies, but the command was able to organize the interaction of the units.
    Probably used flares and flags?
    1. strannik1985 1 June 2020 16: 02 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Probably used flares and flags?

      All Pz.Kpfw. I was equipped with a VHF radio Fu 2. Transmitters on command vehicles.
      1. vladcub 1 June 2020 20: 55 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Thanks for the clarification. I was not interested in the history of tanks and somewhere I heard that the T-1s were more like a tankette and without a walkie-talkie, but how reliable I was
    2. Dr. Frankenstucker 1 June 2020 23: 18 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Quote: vladcub
      and flags?


      flag signals in the Panzervaff were practiced only until 1937)
  • Volga073 2 June 2020 17: 57 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    Britain cowardly escaped - and she is called the winner?