I've read some about the evacuation and I'll admit that a lot of information I have is based on the latest Nolan Movie, which Id argue makes the British look less than brave.

I understand that they had their backs against the wall and that the British army faced total anhhilation, but they still had 300k armed soldiers who could have made a stand if need be. I know it wouldn't be ideal to engage in combat, but as a last resort were there any plans to try to make a stand? I always compare this, probably inapproprately, to the American 101st in Bastogne who faced overwhelming odds and were surrounded but decided to dig in and fight.

Now do the Army's surrender in the Philippines as the comparison instead of the 101st. Glass houses and stuff.

TresPuertas said:

---

I've read some about the evacuation and I'll admit that a lot of information I have is based on the latest Nolan Movie, which Id argue makes the British look less than brave.

I understand that they had their backs against the wall and that the British army faced total anhhilation, but they still had 300k armed soldiers who could have made a stand if need be. I know it wouldn't be ideal to engage in combat, but as a last resort were there any plans to try to make a stand? I always compare this, probably inapproprately, to the American 101st in Bastogne who faced overwhelming odds and were surrounded but decided to dig in and fight.

---

No that never would have happened

keep in mind there were large French forces along with the British at Dunkirk - and both were holding out for an ENTIRE WEEK to defend the landing beaches.

and still getting pushed back.

LOGISTICS ARE WHAT WIN MODERN WARS

and how do you resupply your crappy British Vickers tanks with fuel and ammo when you are surrounded and being bombed by the Luftwaffe?

James Holland is a great British historian

https://youtube.com/sharing/invite/lgJ4yODy0-hEbmfw?w=fUO_ULHqVmM

I HAVE THAT BOOK lol

didn't the German army basically have to stop because their soldiers were literally too weary to move forward anymore? I seem to recall that being the case, basically they'd been going on their pervitin so long they couldn't go anymore.

AgBQ-00 said:

---

didn't the German army basically have to stop because their soldiers were literally too weary to move forward anymore? I seem to recall that being the case, basically they'd been going on their pervitin so long they couldn't go anymore.

---

They paused for about 2-3 days.

-The whole Wehrmacht had outrun their logistics (a problem throughout the war for them).

-Their armored formations had outrun the infantry divisions and were mechanically worn out (@ 50% out of commission rate).

-They still had to consider taking the rest of France and were afraid of a counterattack(s) given their units strained mutual support, lack of logistical support and worn condition of their armor. ( The Battle of Arras had severely spooked the Germans)

- Goering told them that the Luftwaffe could finish the job and they didn't believe that there could be an effective evacuation by sea.

BQ_90 said:

---

Quote:

---

- Goering told them that the Luftwaffe could finish the job and they didn't believe that there could be an effective evacuation by sea

---

thank goodness they kept listening and believing his promises that he couldn't keep

---

This was before the Battle of Britain, so the Luftwaffe was undefeated at this point

What would have been gained by the British army staying?

Do you want them to launch an offensive and get slaughtered?

Or do you want them to just stay there and hold the port as the Germans bring up artillery and more air power, and eventually get killed that way?

And once that British army is gone, as another poster mentioned, what's left to defend England if the Germans cross the channel? Who is left with experience to train a new army? Would parliament even let Churchill keep fighting?

It's almost always more important to preserve your army with a disorderly retreat than fight to the last man. Look at our own revolutionary war. George Washington spent most of the war playing Fabian Tactics, trying to keep the army together, avoiding bad engagements, trying to find opportunistic wins. He had to run away a lot, but it kept the army together until he was able to lay a knockout blow at Yorktown.

Aggie_Journalist said:

---

What would have been gained by the British army staying?

Do you want them to launch an offensive and get slaughtered?

Or do you want them to just stay there and hold the port as the Germans bring up artillery and more air power, and eventually get killed that way?

And once that British army is gone, as another poster mentioned, what's left to defend England if the Germans cross the channel? Who is left with experience to train a new army? Would parliament even let Churchill keep fighting?

It's almost always more important to preserve your army with a disorderly retreat than fight to the last man. Look at our own revolutionary war. George Washington spent most of the war playing Fabian Tactics, trying to keep the army together, avoiding bad engagements, trying to find opportunistic wins. He had to run away a lot, but it kept the army together until he was able to lay a knockout blow at Yorktown.

---

I guess i wasn't clear about what i was asking. CLEARLY evacuation was the best option. what i'm asking is was there a plan if they couldn't get off?

From what i understand there were 300,000 soldiers who were armed and while I know the Nazis had tanks ready to roll , it still seems like 300,000 could cause a hell of a lot of damage.

and i'll state again, the movie clouds my judgement, particularly the part where the guys are standing on the pier and start getting dive bombed by stukkas and it didn't show them raise a rifle. i know one man with a rifle wouldn't make a difference but a bunch of guys throwing a wall of lead up may.

again. I'm not a historian. I'm just curious

They probably would have done what the French did, a mass surrender to avoid the useless demise of the BEF.

They would have surrendered like Singapore.

Question then would Britain have pursued a peace deal with Germany.