Should De Gaulle be in?

[Komet-163]

On Looking at another topic where the Soviet General's were dicussed i started thinking about who else should be in. Should Charles De Gaulle be in? in WWII he can be seen as similar to Eisenhower in that he started as military and ended up as politian. De Gaulle did serve on the western Front in 1940 he was leader of the french 1st Armoured division and was engaged twice with Guderian's Panzers following the Sedan breakthrough. Air power proved a valuable asset on both occasions and the german's provailed. But if a General like Weygand Who was in Charge of syria until Mid-may 1940 and joined the battle at it's final phases, and also was completly outdated, why shoudnt De Gaulle?

[jon_j_rambo]

Sure, add him, but I don't think he'll help.

[JerseyJohn]

I'd have Bilotte, Gamelin and Weygand available as the original French HQs ...

With DeGaule available as a Free French HQ that can be made by the British after France has fallen.

[Exel]

De Gaulle was France's best general already in 1940. He was one of the few French generals who realized the importance of armor, and who wasn't stuck in pre-WWI methods. So he should be in from the start, but should automatically transition to the Free French when Vichy is created.

[JerseyJohn]

True, but look at the system they were using -- it was pure seniority and politics for higher commands, he had neither going for him.

They would have found another ten or more old, moribund generals for such a position before DeGaule ever came up.

LeClerc was another excellent French general but the same would be said of him that is said of DeGaulle.

Young Firebrands in the Third Republic High Command were usually in their mid-sixties and wanted a return to the horse for both cavalry, pulling ordnance and supplies. The senior generals were in a never-never land of military backwardness.

[Exel]

So very true. It's kinda funny to think about it actually, since both the French and the Soviets gave the high commanding positions to their veteran "grand-old-men" heroes of WWI, while the Germans appreciated the fresh modern thinking of the new breed of generals and gave them influential positions. And the rest is history.

I wonder how successful Germans war efforts had been if Guderian, Rommel and Manstein had been facing DeGaulle and LeClerc instead of their seniors.

[Roosevelt45]

Ok, so De Gaulle fought in France in 1940 and was one of the better French generals.But as soon as Vichy France was created his role became much more political.I still agree he should be included but if he is in will Pétain be as well?

[JerseyJohn]

Petain was in his eighties and only a figure head, why should he be represented as a general? That's like having a game for the 1958 baseball season and saying Ty Cobb should be included because he hadn't died yet.

Also, where were the Vichy Armies? The only place I know of where Vichy troops put up a real and successful battle was Dakar, where they were mainly fighting other Frenchmen.

A lot of us feel that the whole Free French representation is wrong -- there were no corps and army sized Free French units, so actually they represent French and Poles and Jews and others who managed to get out of occupied Europe to join the British, but on this scale representing them is difficult.

It's true that DeGaulle was mainly a political figure after the Free French came into existence, but as those troops aren't affected by other Allied HQs it might to be good to have a FreeFrench HQ that makes them more combat able.

[Liam]

So few French fought on, I think it should be a limit of 1 French corps as FF... If you liberate Paris then automatically get De Gaulle behind Paris <political or not French Generals are worthless, in 1940 they're the 2nd largest Military in the game of SC, why don't they deserve some decent leadership at a price?>

[JerseyJohn]

I think a lot of French and Poles fought on but were incorporated into regular British and Common Wealth units. There were a few small units called Jewish Brigade, Polish Brigade or Free French Brigade, but they aren't indicative of the large numbers of men who made their way to Britain to fight for the UK.

This is one of the areas that I believe should be properly resolved.

I also like your idea of automatically creating a DeGaulle HQ as there were many French units making the drive on the Rhine. -- Regrettably they were notorious for murdering German POWs.

[Liam]

John, I don't think the French were very prepared for the situation. Hard to say what Americans would of done had Japan taken the West Coast for a year or two aye? The reprisals for crimes committed on Americans would've been bad. War is bloody though all over, Was it Stalin who suggested executing a certian # of German Officers so a WW3 wouldn't break out?

[Roosevelt45]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

Petain was in his eighties and only a figure head, why should he be represented as a general? That's like having a game for the 1958 baseball season and saying Ty Cobb should be included because he hadn't died yet.

Also, where were the Vichy Armies? The only place I know of where Vichy troops put up a real and successful battle was Dakar, where they were mainly fighting other Frenchmen.

I see your point but I thought that since De Gaulle considered Pétain as kind of his Nemesis It would be nice to have both in.

Now about the Vichy armies. I'm not surprised that you only heard of their performance at Dakar because that was I think their only decent battle throughout the war. They also fought in Syria and furher down Western Africa and were indeed mainly fighting other frenchmen(dumbasses)