If the German's had them surrounded, why didn't they just storm the beach and slaughter everybody?

If the German's had them surrounded, why didn't they just storm the beach and slaughter everybody?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/KnrRy6kSFF0
youtube.com/watch?v=Q95__gXJ9l0
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Hitler had a soft spot for the British and thought they would sign a peace treaty after France fell

you do realize that Britain and France declared war on Germany, not the other way around?

I've heard two stories, not sure which is true.

1. A huge fog suddenly rolled in, which negated the air superiority the Germans had secured, meaning that instead of just bombing them to shit they had to take the time to attack only from the ground.

2. Hitler let the British escape because he thought that would be the end of the war. It didn't make sense to him that they'd be so persistently invested in what he viewed as simple reclamation of land that rightfully belonged to Germany.

Again, not sure which one is true, could be a combination of both.

Because the Krauts over extended their supply lines like the subhumans they are and got BTFO by big british cock

hitler was concerned by the speed of advance and did not want to overextend his supply lines

german tanks were almost out of fuel, troops low on sleep, strategically a pause was actually the correct decision, dont forget he had just routed the french army and has millions of french soliders still to deal with; a successful counter push at that point could have been a disaster

Germans are a mostly retarded race of people, the only reason they got as far as they did in WWII is because Hitler ignored the advice of his braindead generals

Because the truth was German Army run in front of they supply line in Dunkirk, there's no soft Spot for the british from the German High Command, just plain terrible German Logistic that cost the whole War for Germany.

...

Because they thought it would make a cool film one day.

because hitler a good boy, he dindu nuffin, he just need mo lebensraum for dem germans

Shh we're pretending he didn't let them go and offer his third of multiple set of peace terms
>400,000 men, rear protected by sandbags, 5 good men(c) and a mg
>enemy consists of 4 planes that are rekt by hardy and a sole uboat with 1 torpedo
Hmmm

>the French hadn't dropped weapons to a man and become nazis themselves
Yes yes the strong resistance lead by women turned the tide

Supppppposedly he wanted to conserve the heavy armor to head south for "fall rot" and continue bashing the french into submission. Then, hopefully, Churchill would accept the inevitable and make a truce with Hitler (remember Neville Chamberlain probably would've jumped at the chance for peace after this)

It really doesn't matter THAT much in the end. They would've fucked themselves in russia one way or another

You can thank the 40,000 french soldiers who fought so the brits could flee for that.

>frogs assblasted they didn't get why screen time in Nolan's epic

jesus christ how clueless can you people be. I'm not saying it's perfect but at least take a fucking look at wikipeida instead of speculating with your wild theories that you heard from a friend of a friend.

The infamous "Halt order" was given by a couple of German Field Marshals , it was then approved by Hitler together with a bunch of generals. It's not something crazy ol' hitler made up in his bunker underground

Basically we just don't know why the chose to stop. There were trouble with the terrian around Dunkirk making advance with the bulk of the army a hassle and the allied forces defended certain areas better than others.

Regarding valid and plausable theories for the full stop (by respected historians not just internet speculation) varies from everything that they wanted to save supplies for further operations or that just thought they were all fuck't anyway / the Luftwaffe would take care of it.


>t. useless BA in history

Sup Forumsacks are delusional and think he let them escape.

Or it could be that the Nazi's were retarded and relied on an unstable Europe to do the damage they did.

Because they're not Aldo's team.

youtu.be/KnrRy6kSFF0

>Britain guarantees Polish sovereignty
>Thus invading Poland would be tantamount to a declaration of war.
>Get given an ultimatum
>Lol nah guys they won't do it.
>OMG warmongering anglos Germans dindunuffin

I want this meme to end.

I think Hitler let them free so that he would have leverage in a peace treaty, ie, "hey guys I let a couple hundred thousand of your men live. Dont wanna fight, call it quits?" But obviously that didn't happen

>wikipedia
>gets told to get an education
>studies (((history)))
Lmao both me and my bank account are laughing @ you
HMU with the historic documents that even mention the Final solution™

Ha ha fuck you

Because massacring hundreds of thousands of soldiers would make Nazi Germany an international pariah

Lots of Sup Forums historical revisionism here. muh hitler was a peaceful soul etc

The real truth is Goring wanted glory and convinced Hitler that the Luftwaffe could reduce the pocket, which was a big failure due to the RAF

*on the Western front

>It really doesn't matter THAT much in the end. They would've fucked themselves in russia one way or another

I agree with everything else you've said, but I think it would have made a difference if Britain was pacified/forced to a truce.
Operation Barbossa almost worked.
The problem was reinforcements and if the Luftwaffe had it's full force on the Soviets, then the supply lines could have been cut. Kursk may not have been such a disaster.

Retard question, French defenders.

If the Germans surrounded the Russians at Leningrad, why didn't they storm the city and slaughter everyone?

If the Russians surrounded the Germans at Demyansk, why didn't they just storm the pocket and slaughter everyone?

If the Germans had the Americans surrounded at Bastogne, why didn't they just storm the town and slaughter everyone?

To who?
Who was left who stood neutral?
America was determined to stay out of the war at that time and so were the Soviets

USSR invasion had to happen, Stalin openly wanted to wait until the fighting in Western Europe would finish, so that the Red Army would invade and prop up dozens of Socialist government across Europe

Why do they need a perfect supply line to butt fuck an army trapped on a beach with no support and no equipment?

the french were holding the perimeter and holding the divisions at lille

Stalin, like Hitler, believed in the Heartland theory.
Which was totally flawed.

It was proposed before the advent of aircraft.
If the Luftwaffe wasn't decimated by attacks on Britain, then the Third Reich could have turned the Heartland advantage against the Russians

Yes yes it is pol that is wrong not you
A place where people used to have to post proof for any claim they made is wrong not you
Unfortunately it is overrun with reddit who defend trump to the death and love jews atm

Goring told Hitler he could annihilate them from the air, and German Wehrmacht logistics, as well as the general conditions of vehicles/troops were fairly burnt out at that point.

>you share this board with schizophrenics

How much is in your bank account? If you make sub ~200k a year don't bother replying

Soooo, you're pissed off with the state of Sup Forums, and decided to bring the "right Sup Forums" to shit up other boards?

I believe you, that sounds a lot like the Sup Forums I know.

Because if they failed the British could break out and retake France.

>germans literally taking pot shots at a ship visible to the field marshal
>hardy is captured after being literally seen by everyone

>germans couldnt do it

lmao

Hitler was not interested in going to war with the British. He was hoping for peace or armistice while he dealt with the commies and the occupation. He respected the British and thought of them as Aryans.

The Germans were stretched thin and low on supplies. It was not good strategy to push. Ignore the "kind uncle adolf" types who feed you some bullshit about how he let them all live out of the goodness of his own heart or whatever. It wasn't just a bunch of British on the beach, there were a ton of French soldiers still fighting and any push by the Germans would have left them wide open.

The ignorant shills on this board amaze me sometimes. Hitler didn't let the brits and french survive because he was a good guy and dindu nuffin. It was a mistake. The German army quite rightly assessed that an evacuation was impossible due to a weak naval presence in the area, so instead of trying to take to coastal towns with almost 400,000 well equipped soldiers with no where to retreat. The common sense solution was to simply bomb them into submission and to avoid potentially tens of thousands of needless German casulties. However to summarise they vastly overestimated the strength of the Luftwaffe after suprisingly high casulties during the French invasion and didn't account for civilian ships being used.

Please educate yourselves before spewing myths in order to make yourselves feel better about your pathetic ideologies.

They had magic potion

>confirms everything I was laughing at
LMAO bragging about his history major peanuts

There is zero chance in hell that the BEF in Dunkirk could have turned around on the Germans
Not with a major materiel shipment across the Channel that the Germans had blockaded

>French soldiers still fighting
Kek

Millennial please go

>The Germans were stretched thin and low on supplies. It was not good strategy to push. Ignore the "kind uncle adolf" types

>muh heroic retreat

He didn't do it out of the kindness of his heart but because he thought of blackmailingthe British into signing a peace treaty. The third Reich never planned on or aspired to have a war with Britain.

One way or the other Brits stopped doing shit from this point on anyways, apart from bombing civilians when the war was virtually over of course.

>having thousands of prisoners isn't leverage

Poles attacked German ethnic minorities and no one cared.

underappreciated post

All those words and acting like a condescending cunt and you're still wrong
the actual answer is that we don't know

would a german invasion of the british isles been successful

It was the female lead resistance that held the Germans off until the Brits could escape

Because the Germans were honorable.

Because they weren't war criminals and the holocaust never happened.

>Blackmailing them into signing a peace treaty
>By letting the core of their army go

Because that doesn't fit the narrative

Tv is the old pol. Just infested with tumblr bc of dr who and got generals

Gee I guess that's why they just retook Danzig and nothing else.

Oh wait.

Meant for

>Repeating literal German propaganda

Of course I'm just repeating ((their)) lies

Oh maybe the letting them escape was the 'not as planned part'. Massacring them wouldn't have been more beneficial though.

As I said either way, British land forces were out one way or the other.

Germany would have won if it made a truce with the Soviet Union allowing it to take the Ukraine and the Baltic states.

Hitler's problem was attacking everyone in one go.

Sounds about as legit as Ukrainians attacking ethnic Russians in Crimea

>a historical movie about WW2
>Doesn't badmouth German soldiers
>No Britbongs are forced diversity brown black or asian soldiers
>Very patriot themed
>Makes men feel good about themselves
Man, SJWs must really hate this film. Nolan does it again.

The only (ONLY) thing Dunkirk is lacking is actual blood and death.
A line of men being strafed by aircraft aren't going to just fall down.
There will be limbs and chunks everywhere

Just /k/ is the old Sup Forums, or /his/, or every other board you faggots keep shitting up because you have no concept of boundaries.

I don't come to Sup Forums to talk about /k/, why is that so hard to understand.

You do realise that you can capture them without massacring them. Killing them all would have worked out anyway because you just removed the heart of the British army. Also consider why the UK would listen to someone who has broken what, 4 previous agreements. I've never seen a good source for this apparent treaty, just abstract feeling about it

Instead consider that at the time of the halt order (which did not originate from Hitler anyway), the panzers are overstreched from their supply lines, the French might muster up a counterattack, and Goering is suggesting that he can pummel it from the air. This video talks a bit about it
youtube.com/watch?v=Q95__gXJ9l0

Actually not him. Reply to both and I'll send you a pic.
I'm going to assume it's sub 200k/year?

Brits singlehandedly beat Italians and Germans in Africa before us turns up right at the end.
Successful intervention in both Iraq and Iran.
Fuck up Germany's surface fleet and force them into using only submarines.
Sink Vichy France's navy.
Sink the Italian navy.
Lose in Norway.
Lose HK and Malaysia but beat the japs up in Burma and Palau new guinea.
Invade scicilly and Italy with US
Invade France with US
Invade low countries with US
Invade Germany with US

That's a really weird way to spell nothing

Beating Italy is no big feat.
Let's be serious here.

Brits did three big admirable things.
They won the Battle of Britain
They survived the Blitz
Their Intelligence network was the best in the world by orders of magnitude

Brits singlehandedly beat Italians and Germans in Africa before us turns up right at the end.
Successful intervention in both Iraq and Iran.
Fuck up Germany's surface fleet and force them into using only submarines.
Sink Vichy France's navy.
Sink the Italian navy.
Lose in Norway.
Lose HK and Malaysia but beat the japs up in Burma and Palau new guinea.
Invade scicilly and Italy with US
Invade France with US
Invade low countries with US
Invade Germany with US

That's a really weird way to spell nothing
The meme of Italy being horrendous at modern warfare partly comes from being trounced by Britain in ww2 despite being at an advantage

>The meme of Italy being horrendous at modern warfare partly comes from
Comes from the Germans and every other nation to interact with them.

Even the German allies who tired to work with Italians found them shiftless and incompetent
Still, that's subjective.
But objective evaluation of their arms and materiel found them to be inferior.
Italian tanks, planes, and rifles were shit

>The meme of Italy being horrendous at modern warfare partly comes from being trounced by Britain in ww2 despite being at an advantage

Everything Hitler said has come true
UK and USA still Jewish puppets, Jews sterilising minorities in Israel, assassinating last man who dared speak of the fed or their Nukes
Try and walk through Whitechapel at night or anywhere in France, Italy or most of America.
Hitler lost and we reap what our masters have sewn

Is Neo-Nazism and defending Hitler and the Nazis the ultimate edgy teenage contrarianism?

Yeah I make less

>Defending that Anglo dog, Churchill

AMACH, SASSENACH

Italians beat the Italians
They were a detriment not a help

Neo-Nazism is an attempt to find meaning in a life that has no meaning
A person looks over their life and their world and finds nothing worth feeling proud of.
So they look at the thing that can never be taken from them or change: Their race.
Nazism tells them that they're special, just for who they are.

It's the same drive behind BLM or other negro supremacist leagues.

Everyone wants to feel special. If you have no accomplishments, you start looking towards fringe things

Kek imagine being so fucking contrarian that you unironically defend a warmongering psychopath who was responsible for millions of deaths until he blew his brains out, because you like memes

It comes from being slowly genocided without war by the same people who had you fight each other for their prosperity and domination

You enjoyed the film then?

That is that fat fuck who bombed an entire city worth of civilians. And the holocaust meme wasn't even invented yet to claim they did it as some kind of revenge.

It's about defending the truth. What you said come from people who cling to theoretical economic utopias like communism and liberalism.

Partly.
Luigi Cordoba was a bad general.

>It's about defending the truth
Why is neo-nazism highly correlated with minimal education then?

Germany wanted Britain to come around to their cause.

Targeting civilians is ok when daddy Hitler does it. But oh does my blood boil when the JEWISH PUPPET does it.

Because you people love to make up bullshit claims.

Same crime as Libya, Iraq and Syria :^)
>jfk and 9/11 bang bang bang

Because he never killed them. That's the point.

Death camps were about exterminating undesirables
There weren't meant in Germany.
Many slavs in Poland.

Death camps were about making lies of the ones not inspected by authorities.

Look up Eisenhower's stance on the concentration camps
Either you call Eisenhower a moron or admit that you're wrong

>Germany and Russia both invade Poland together and split up up between them
>Britain and France declare war on Germany for invading Poland
>become allies with Russia, despite them also invading Poland

hmm really makes me think.

NEVER FORGET THE POLISH DEATH CAMPS

Why does a death camp have a swimming pool and an orchestra?

You retards are falling for a Sup Forums bait thread