Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: semantic

I guess it’s reasonable to say that it’s hard to define “defeat” until there’s a formal ceremony, and obviously DeGaulle didn’t think Petain had any weight to speak for the entire nation so long as a defense could be mounted from...Martinique?! (being coy there...there was always Algeria!).

But I think territorially the Wehrmacht won more then just a tactical skirmish line. Occupying Paris and all the way to the sea in Brittany is pretty convincing.

And saying they were defeated in WWI is certainly stretching it more: that was really a strategic stalemate and nothing more, that was when the French army was still formidable. But being bled white very rapidly...

So I can agree with some criticism of the blanket statement I made, but we can all agree that real defeat would have been permanent had not the real allies - England, America and Russia - been in the fight.

And yes, it was a matter of time before the twin programs of the fission bomb and the bomber to deliver it would have decisively ended the argument. So a view from 30,000 ft would be “they have a lot of ground, but it won’t help them in the end” is reasonable.

Germany is lucky that the 3rd Army punched through into the Rhineland when they did. Had they not, Berlin would have been the first place on the planet to be turned into a radioactive cinder.


110 posted on 11/13/2018 1:40:53 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies ]


To: Regulator
The ultimate question is: what actually constitutes "defeat"? Is there a time line? If so, how long is it? For instance, today Germany completely controls the continent. France goes along as their side kick, with the two countries combined proving to be in the same (economic) league as the other primary spheres, such as the US & China.

I've traveled pretty extensively throughout Europe, and much to my wife's boredom, I usually zero in on their respective military museums. And what is perhaps most striking is that *no one* every gets the "permanent" jump on anyone else. Every major country has experienced both victory and loss. Oh sure, they may be down for a hundred years or so, but then the tables get turned.

And then, if one wants to get really philosophical, consider the Roman republic/empire, which last for almost 1k years in the west, and 2k if we count the east. To what extent did they impart a lasting influence? Law, language, customs? But holding territory, enforcing laws, imposing tribute/taxes - all dust in the wind.

Same true in Europe today - defeated the Moslems 400 years ago - but now subject to invasion and control. And yet, time doesn't stop here either, because a backwards Islamic country in 100-200 years will be ripe pickings from an technologically advanced country like, say a combined Polish/Czech/Hungarian force.

114 posted on 11/13/2018 1:59:42 PM PST by semantic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson