Historical Question -- French troops '44 vs. French troops '40

[Aacooper]

If I may summarize in a sentence, the French troops in 1940 fought with poor doctrine, few tank radios, and weren't real motivated as a group (though there were notable exceptions). The French troops in 1944-45 that helped retake France do not get a lot of ink in the English-language histories I've read. So I don't know a lot about the Free French First Army.

My questions are

1) How good compared to the other Allied forces were the French (in your opinion)?

2) Where did the French soldiers come from (colonial troops, evacuated troops, etc...)?

3) What type of training did they receive?

4) Were there any other circumstances besides the obvious (American equipment, revenge motivation) that produced a different result in 1944-45 vs. 1940?

[ARCHANGEL]

Regarding item # 4.

I would suggest leadership. The leadership in 1944 was no longer made up of old men who were still fighting with a Great War pov.

Love 'em or hate 'em, DeGaulle and LeClerc and some of the others were young Col's. and low ranking General's in 1940. In 1944 they ran the show and employed the different idea's, along with "lessons learned" to great advantage. Having the US/UK support didn't hurt.

[Guest Babra]

Training was in British Battle Schools at least until '42. They came from all the places you mentioned.

[werfer]

Right on the nose Archangel, you said it perfect.

[Hakko Ichiu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aacooper:

2) Where did the French soldiers come from (colonial troops, evacuated troops, etc...)?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've recently finished the section on the Battle of France in Keegan's "Second World War". He mentions that the colonial troops fought far better and more bravely than most of the French nationals. He describes the general populace of France as rather decadent and demoralized. Not a great conscription pool.

Ethan

------------------

Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

[Major Tom]

de Gaulle was in command of the 4th Reserve Armoured Division, a heavy tank formation with little infantry support. The French generals of May 1940 had the knowledge of modern warfare, many units were the equals to Germany's. The Corps de Cavalerie was of 3 Light Mechanized Divisions which were WAY ahead of their time. Approximately 200 medium and light tanks accompanied by an entire brigade of Motorized Infantry, these units made GREAT showings of themselves. The problem was, that the new commanders were in such low ranks, or, gained command too late in the campaign to do anything about it.

General Weygand, who took command of the Shattered remnants of the French army in June 1940 was a brilliant, yet old strategist. He developed the tactic of Hedgehogs, Infantry forces with LOADS of artillery and AT defending only forests and towns, leaving fields and areas good for tanks open and any advance to be crushed by a mobile reserve. He was able to defend a longer front better with just 60 divisions in June 1940 then the French commanders were able to do with 100 divisions on a shorter front in May. German casualties, especially in their Armoured formations were EXTREMELY high. However, due to 50% of French tanks being lost in the previous month there wasn't enough of a mobile reserve to smash all the German bridgeheads. If they used this tactic (which was adoped by NATO to repel a Soviet attack) in May 1940 the German army would have been stopped.

There were 100 000+ Vichy soldiers in Algeria and Tunisia in 1942. They joined the Allies after token resistence and formed a crack core. They were EXTREMELY well trained, being of the highest quality of soldier (those who managed to escape from the continent to Algeria). By 1944 the French resolve for revenge was much higher then in 1940.

French equipment, even for the infantry divisions, was as good, if not better then that of Germany. The German army did not start ENTIRELY from scratch. Many guns were just slightly modernized versions of WWI weapons. Many weapons were taken over from the Austrians and Czech's (3 Entire Panzer divisions were equipped with Czech tanks!). Although they lacked radios, French tanks were as good as the Germans, and indeed, they posessed better light tanks. The French airforce was as modern as Germany's, yet, deployed incorrectly. Most of the Modern bombers and fighters weren't located in Metropolitan France. only around 800 of the 1200 Moraine-Saulnier aircraft were in France.

The Belgian Army was also given a bad rap. Actually, the Germans respected the Belgian army more than any other, for their historical resistence in 1914, and their bravery in 1940. Totally outgunned they held their own, only to be betrayed by their King and circumstance.

[This message has been edited by Major Tom (edited 03-11-2000).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

French troops of 1944 were, from what I know, pretty good overall. 1940... mixed bag for a lot of reasons. One of the problems with the Army of 1940 was that it was easily defeated in the strategic sense. Yes, quite a few units put up pretty stiff resistance, but only after it was clear the war was lost. The initial battles were a piece of cake in comparison because the French never expected the Germans to do what they did.

I did a thesis paper on this topic a while back and from my research it was clear that by 1940 France had no chance of winning PRIOR to the German attack. Yes, in theory all the building blocks were there to make a pretty good and strong defense (well, the airforce was not so good), but the design was all wrong. The French litterally tried to make a wall and that is one of the most famous blunders of the 20th Century. It is easier to make better bricks than engineer a stronger wall. I see 1940 France as having lots of great quality bricks, but no mortar and no design of any worth, so in the end what good are the bricks?

There was litterally no chance in Hell that the French would have been able to resist the German invasion. Not unless you count going back 20 years prior and totally rewriting history and a decent chunck of culture at the same time.

Steve