1. The 'main body' of the Anglo-French divisions were 100 km from the Channel coastline on 21 May, so logically, most of them could not have been at Lille.ljadw wrote: ↑15 Oct 2023 13:59As I expected, you try to avoid to answer my questionspaulskordilis wrote: ↑15 Oct 2023 12:021. The main body of the Anglo-French were 100km from the Channel Coast, and as Macksey points out, the Germans were sufficiently close to have swept into the undefended Channel ports on 21 May had they wished. Under a day’s drive, and far closer than the Anglo-French.ljadw wrote: ↑15 Oct 2023 11:11Virtually is not a serious argument .paulskordilis wrote: ↑15 Oct 2023 10:311. The Channel ports were virtually undefended on 21 May.ljadw wrote: ↑15 Oct 2023 09:25
All you have is a claim from Frieser without any proof which you are repeating .
In Fall Rot, Robert Forckzyk writes that half of the German trucks and tanks were no longer operational ,when the first Halt Order was issued ,which means that only a small number of tanks could advance to Dunkirk,without the support of the infantry and artillery,and without this support tanks are powerless .
2. Forczyk is clearly talking about the situation on 24 May, when the Germans may or may not have captured Dunkirk. Without the Haltebefehl on either 15 or 21 May Haltebefehl, the infamous debate would have been moot, given that the Germans would have already been in the woefully underdefended ports.
It is also avoiding the decisive points,which are
1 How far were the Germans from the Channel ports on 21 May ?
2 How strong were the Germans on 21 May ?
2. The farce at Arras virtually denuded the Allies of tanks, with only 37/225 Axis tanks lost. Without the Haltebefehl on 21 May, three days of fighting against the newly positioned Calais garrison etc. would have been entirely averted.
The truth is that the French were still in Lille til 31 May 1940 and Lille is some 75 km from Dunkirk .
It is also not so that the Germans were close enough to sweep into Dunkirk on 21 May ,because : you have NO sources that indicate how strong were the Germans at Abbeville (150 km from Dunkirk ) and Arras (110 km from Dunkirk ) at the evening of 20 May .The only thing we may assume is that they were very weak .
And about Arras : this is totally irrelevant as the allies could engage during Fall Gelb the few German tanks without needing their own tanks .And the allies were not denuded of tanks : they lost 74 tanks only, the Germans 37 .
On 24 May there were parts of the 1st PzD and of the LSSAH between the coast and St Omer ( source : Frieser ) .All we know is that on 21 May these elements were farther away from Dunkirk and smaller .That is a fact that you must accept or you must prove the opposite = that on 21 May the Germans were closer to Dunkirk and stronger .
2. The Allies losing 74/74 tanks at Arras is a scale of destruction on par with how the pre-war Soviet tank formations ceased to exist in the first few weeks of Barbarossa.
3. The Germans had 188 tanks remaining on 21 May, so they were stronger. They could have reached Dunkirk on the same day without the 21 May Haltebefehl, so they were far closer than the Allies. I have no time to waste accepting your nonsense 'facts' and propositions. The burden is on *you* to prove the opposite, which is clearly proving to be an impossible task.