Hitler's controversial order about Dunkirk

[jesk]

... the poorly informed garbage spewing forthwith deleted ...

Have a read of these. Well informed. Well researched. Well written.

The Dunkirk evacuation and the German ‘halt’ order
https://defenceindepth.co/2016/07/11/th ... alt-order/

Dunkirk: a miracle of war
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/5902 ... f-war.html

You do not think about what you read. Your worldview tells you that this is a myth about Hitler, who released the English. Found the information and discarded, read ... It is sometimes necessary to read all the same into the meaning written ..
And your links are spam, because they expose the "myth of Hitler and good generals." Already only therefore spam on which shouldn't pay attention.

In other words, your links, MarkN, are garbage, but any of my links that I publish can be trusted. So let's see, you've now graduated from "Moving of the Goal Posts" to "Dismissing of Others Links as Garbage". Interesting. :roll:

I'm commenting on the contents of the links. You and Mark have a superficial analysis. Moreover, he put a phrase in my mouth that I did not say. I did not write this :

... the poorly informed garbage spewing forthwith deleted ...

Have a read of these. Well informed. Well researched. Well written.

The Dunkirk evacuation and the German ‘halt’ order
https://defenceindepth.co/2016/07/11/th ... alt-order/

Dunkirk: a miracle of war
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/5902 ... f-war.html

To the surprise, many are not interested in real history. There is a wretched worldview, under which conclusions are fitted. This is expressed in the search for information on the Internet, when the "wrong" links are ignored, suitable for views, the opinion is supported.

[jesk]

On May 26, Hitler grossly violated the main principle of the strategy. To beat the enemy with superior forces. The protrusion in the south, the place of maximum concentration of enemy units, is divided into 2 sectors and the Germans are ordered to attack. Instead of hitting the rear and attacking on a broad front, in search of weak points of defense, a dull frontal assault. This point is often overlooked when considering Dunkirk. The encirclement of enemy forces in Lille is sabotage.

[Richard Anderson]

11 corps with four divisions withdrawn to the reserve.

Sorry, but no, XI. AK and its four divisions were not "withdrawn" anywhere - "reserve" or otherwise - on 31 May. It was transferred in place from 6. Armee to 18. Armee.

[Gorque]

... the poorly informed garbage spewing forthwith deleted ...

Have a read of these. Well informed. Well researched. Well written.

The Dunkirk evacuation and the German ‘halt’ order
https://defenceindepth.co/2016/07/11/th ... alt-order/

Dunkirk: a miracle of war
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/5902 ... f-war.html

You do not think about what you read. Your worldview tells you that this is a myth about Hitler, who released the English. Found the information and discarded, read ... It is sometimes necessary to read all the same into the meaning written ..
And your links are spam, because they expose the "myth of Hitler and good generals." Already only therefore spam on which shouldn't pay attention.

In other words, your links, MarkN, are garbage, but any of my links that I publish can be trusted. So let's see, you've now graduated from "Moving of the Goal Posts" to "Dismissing of Others Links as Garbage". Interesting. :roll:

I'm commenting on the contents of the links. You and Mark have a superficial analysis. Moreover, he put a phrase in my mouth that I did not say. I did not write this :

Of course, any analysis that doesn't support your viewpoint is flawed and superficial. BTW, since when is a dismissal of a link without an editorial discussing the contents of the link considered a comment? Finally, where have I opined either for or against any information in MarkN's link, other than in your mind?

[Gorque]

11 corps with four divisions withdrawn to the reserve.

Sorry, but no, XI. AK and its four divisions were not "withdrawn" anywhere - "reserve" or otherwise - on 31 May. It was transferred in place from 6. Armee to 18. Armee.

Oh my! It looks like a certain someone is "not interested in real history", but more in a "wretched worldview, under which conclusions are fitted.".

I wonder what will follow, a wall of text, the moving of the goal-posts, or an outright dismissal of the above?

[MarkN]

On May 26, Hitler grossly violated the main principle of the strategy. Blah blah blah and more blah

The subject title is: Hitler's controversial order about Dunkirk.

1. Did Hitler issue the initial 'halt' order? Yes or no?

2a. If not, who issued the initial 'halt' order?
2b. When did they issue this order?
2c. Why did they issue this order?

3a. Who then confirmed and supported this decision and order?
3b. When did they confirm and support this descision and order?
3c. Why did they confirm and support this descision and order?

Have you considered those questions and come up with some sensible answers? I don't see the reason for spamming the thread with your tangental opinion other than to mask your poor knowledge of the event and to push an ahistorical agenda.

[jesk]

The subject title is: Hitler's controversial order about Dunkirk.

1. Did Hitler issue the initial 'halt' order? Yes or no?

2a. If not, who issued the initial 'halt' order?
2b. When did they issue this order?
2c. Why did they issue this order?

3a. Who then confirmed and supported this decision and order?
3b. When did they confirm and support this descision and order?
3c. Why did they confirm and support this descision and order?

Have you considered those questions and come up with some sensible answers? I don't see the reason for spamming the thread with your tangental opinion other than to mask your poor knowledge of the event and to push an ahistorical agenda.

Yes, Hitler issued the initial order to stop. Rundstedt's order to postpone the beginning of the offensive from May 24 to 25 was of a technical nature. Hitler abolished the offensive altogether. The order of Rundstedt on May 23 and Hitler on May 24 with each other has nothing in common.

[jesk]

Of course, any analysis that doesn't support your viewpoint is flawed and superficial. BTW, since when is a dismissal of a link without an editorial discussing the contents of the link considered a comment? Finally, where have I opined either for or against any information in MarkN's link, other than in your mind?

And it's interesting. You have nothing to say on the topic and you intuitively try to lean back to the opinion in this discussion.

[jesk]

To the surprise, many are not interested in real history. There is a wretched worldview, under which conclusions are fitted. This is expressed in the search for information on the Internet, when the "wrong" links are ignored, suitable for views, the opinion is supported.

I myself will answer. Why people have nothing to say on the topic and by and large they are not interested in the real story. They do not know the basic principles of military theory. How wars and battles are won. When you start to understand all this, one immediately becomes aware of the terrible German mistakes in the conduct of the war. Analysis who is behind this, always points to Hitler.

[ljadw]

When you start to understand all this, one immediately becomes aware of the terrible German mistakes in the conduct of the war. Analysis who is behind this, always points to Hitler.

"The German generals talk " is not good for one's health .

[Gorque]

Of course, any analysis that doesn't support your viewpoint is flawed and superficial. BTW, since when is a dismissal of a link without an editorial discussing the contents of the link considered a comment? Finally, where have I opined either for or against any information in MarkN's link, other than in your mind?

And it's interesting. You have nothing to say on the topic and you intuitively try to lean back to the opinion in this discussion.

That's correct. I have no opinion on the topic other than to follow and hopefully glean some information about the topic from those posters that, unlike you, are genuine in wanting to enlighten others in the events that transpired through reasoned and polite discourse. Is there a problem with my highlighting the deficiencies, intentional or not, that you exhibit?

[Gorque]

To the surprise, many are not interested in real history. There is a wretched worldview, under which conclusions are fitted. This is expressed in the search for information on the Internet, when the "wrong" links are ignored, suitable for views, the opinion is supported.

I myself will answer. Why people have nothing to say on the topic and by and large they are not interested in the real story. They do not know the basic principles of military theory. How wars and battles are won. When you start to understand all this, one immediately becomes aware of the terrible German mistakes in the conduct of the war. Analysis who is behind this, always points to Hitler.

Hi Jesk:

I hope you realize that you have just replied your own quote.

[Richard Anderson]

When you start to understand all this, one immediately becomes aware of the terrible German mistakes in the conduct of the war. Analysis who is behind this, always points to Hitler.

"The German generals talk " is not good for one's health .

Why is it that a certain episode of Fawlty Towers keeps going round and round in my head? It "always points to Hitler"? Oh, of course...

Basil Fawlty: Is there something wrong?

German Guest: Will you stop talking about the war?

Basil Fawlty: Me? You started it.

German Guest: We did not!

Basil Fawlty: Yes, you did. You invaded Poland in 1939...

[MarkN]

Why is it that a certain episode of Fawlty Towers keeps going round and round in my head? It "always points to Hitler"? Oh, of course...

Basil Fawlty: Is there something wrong?

German Guest: Will you stop talking about the war?

Basil Fawlty: Me? You started it.

German Guest: We did not!

Basil Fawlty: Yes, you did. You invaded Poland in 1939...

I think you're missing the point - the agenda - spamming the forum...

Basil Faulty got it wrong. He clearly didn't understand the basic principles of war and had not had the pleasure of a good Soviet education.

The Germans are not to blame for starting the war, invading Poland et al. It was all Hitler's doing and his doing alone.

[jesk]

That's correct. I have no opinion on the topic other than to follow and hopefully glean some information about the topic from those posters that, unlike you, are genuine in wanting to enlighten others in the events that transpired through reasoned and polite discourse. Is there a problem with my highlighting the deficiencies, intentional or not, that you exhibit?

If you read my posts, I showed there, in fact, there were 3 stop-orders. On 24, 26 and 28 May, the German troops delayed their leadership. All the threads of miraculous salvation from Hitler.