World War II: The Fall of France - Full Documentary

[@graycinmarchese4682]

This speech is completely chilling. It puts the stakes on world war 2 into such a massive perspective. Thousands of years of history ancient countries could have been lost

[@Online_ToughGuy]

Yeah. Thank God we have ethnic replacement through mass immigration and drag queen story hour. To think we’d all be speaking German!

[@rob5944]

@@Online_ToughGuy I gotta admit you have a point there. The ridiculous thing is that most people think the same but are afraid to say.

[@shdhddjji]

​@@rob5944😂😂😂 who's larry

[@AckzaTV]

yeah churchill is like "Im not trying tyo prophesize but heres a prophecy that people in 100 years will look back at in awe"

[@jjt1881]

15:58 Sorry, but France did have many tanks and they were not lightly armored. They were superior than those of the Germans. That was not the reason they failed to repel Hitler's armies.

[@danielpalaguachi2937]

Yep

[@danielpalaguachi2937]

True

[@gregmannix3936]

When discussing the bombing of Rotterdam he says 30,000 men women and children were killed in 90 minutes. Everything I’ve ever read on the bombing said between 800-900 people were killed. This was an interesting documentary but doesn’t seem to be completely accurate

[@kevint10121]

France is a joke to what the German army had. It took 3 huge countries to beat them. Hitter got too full of himself.

[@ThePatureaux]

No, the French tanks weren't superior, except their thicker armor. They had the same gun caliber but a slower velocity, they were slower, heavier, burned a lot of gas, and had NO RADIOS. Besides, their tactics was outdated.

[@michaellazzaro129]

How is the documentary about the fall of France longer than the actual fall of France? Lmao

[@rescuepetsrule6842]

LOL-IKR! Pansies...

[@yomeyo6622]

French government: Listen, you little shit...

[@makfrags14]

Spittin straight bars

[@oceanhome2023]

Anybody who loves the never completed story of WW2 will love this video . It contains several videos and pics that I had never seen before . The speech given by Churchill in the first part of the video was unseen before and most excellent !!!

[@kidofsteel0362]

It literally never ends. No matter how much I’ve read about it or how many documentaries I’ve watched I always find something new.

[@rescuepetsrule6842]

@@kidofsteel0362 Please continue to comment-we need people that actually LEARN before commenting, such as Felipe Cortez above. :)

[@kidofsteel0362]

@@rescuepetsrule6842 Mr Filipe deleted his comment lol. But yes I feel like there’s always something new for me to learn regarding WW2 despite how much I’ve already read & watched on it! It’s so crazy!

[@zach6395]

Can anyone link or point where to find that speech?

[@maxanderson9293]

@@kidofsteel0362 this documentary is worst one I have seen on his topic, 40000 armored vehicles. Where did they get that ? Because it's gross exaggeration.

[@CrossOfBayonne]

The Allies expected this to be a repeat of WW1 20 years earlier and in a sense it was only that Hitler had a different trick up his sleeve and used mechanized warfare instead of trenches British and French troops used.

[@C77-C77]

Not Allies. Just Britain and France. Then just Britain. US didn't start fighting until 1941, but kept Britain alive with supplies from 1940 on. The US WERE the Allied Powers. Produced everything needed to fight the war at an astounding rate, and had 6 Million men enlisted. Produced the greatest fighter planes of the era, including the F4U Corsair, which could take down anything, 11-1 kill ratio in the Pacific. Tanks were lacking armor and firepower, but they produced so many it never mattered, and had the best seperate anti-tank gun of the war. Only nation that had an 8 round capacity semi-auto rifle standard in every soldiers hands. USSR was forced into it simply because Hitler had invaded his country when they were perfectly willing to work together at one point. Then they savaged it right up, raping and pillaging everything along the way. No Allied nation.

[@CrossOfBayonne]

@@C77-C77 Yes because we were supplying them via lend lease such as weapons and food etc

[@brandonmcgrew4367]

Winston Churchill’s voice is calming

[@marchellochiovelli7259]

For a stinking drunk, I suppose you are right

[@brandonmcgrew4367]

@@marchellochiovelli7259 exactly it’s soothing in a way😂with the English accent

[@thediaz07]

@@brandonmcgrew4367 I Prefer s'RELTIH voice personally.

[@brandonmcgrew4367]

@@thediaz07 took me a second lmao

[@awos6559]

It’s interesting to think about Churchill’s understanding of “freedom!” He wanted freedom from Hitler but wanted to keep the British empire over people elsewhere around the world. Same for the French at the time. They were fighting hitler but Algeria and other places couldn’t be allowed to be independent from them. It’s interesting to examine how these people and countries saw themselves. Somehow they saw what Hitler was doing, but at least in the beginning didn’t see themselves that way when it came to their colonies.

[@meltedicecreamsandwich]

This is why don't feel bad for all the colonial powers getting invaded. To me it was karma.

[@ellaw356]

Probably bc weren’t being “executed “ at that time, Example: Polish people . Britain were “protective powers”, which means that they fight their wars. I agree but look at many of the countries once British left. Ex…Hong Kong perhaps?? But I do see your point.

[@thediaz07]

Honestly I wouldn't have been mad if Germany had won the control for Europe, the Genocides were disgusting and for that they should've lost but if they just expelled peoples they didn't want it would be shitty but equal to England's imperialism.

[@LiberRaider]

Remember that while democracy at the time was not extended to European colonies, those colonies were not democracies when they were colonized. I think what Churchill and others believed is that giving those colonies like India independence at that time would have led to Civil War and instability. Hard to argue that they were completely wrong. Just looking at the post-colonial state of affairs of many former colonies today. Just my two cents.

[@28ebdh3udnav]

It's the same still with the British and the French. They talk about freedom for other countries yet they don't even allow their own citizens to own even a single gun. During the war, the wanted everyone to resist with guerrilla warfare with guns....

[@oceanhome2023]

The building of bridges under cannon fire is amazing and the soldiers remain unfazed

[@RonSommar]

Actually they were pumped full of drugs...

[@jfw091]

This video cites the Bombing of Rotterdam as killing 30,000. It killed 884. Numbers are hard, especially when your still citing the figures the Dutch/Holland Governments put out after the attacks in 1940.

[@Roy-xe9is]

and your point is...

[@evanlandry7337]

This documentary is like 15 years old dumbass

[@indy_go_blue6048]

True. I have a 1980 book that sets the number at 900. This was the number announced by the Dutch, as you say, who corrected it after the war.

[@kevint10121]

30,000 buildings I think he meant to say. Houses/buildings ect.

[@CompagnonDeMisere25]

@@Roy-xe9is That the numbers are inaccurate.

[@JamesTHearn]

I do not understand why France allowed themselves to be guided by a bunch of old fogey fartheads! Marshall Petain refused to use radio communications fearing interception so he used pigeons! He, located far from the front, relied on a method that was certainly SLOW compared to radio. He did have some wonderful French chefs prepare his meals. Old WW1 thinking that cost them dearly. I am also surprised that the British who seemed to understand that technology had drastically changed things did not tell the French that if they wanted their help they needed to make some major changes in the command structure. I am a Vietnam veteran and know something about how the military operates. I can only hope and pray that egos do not prevail over common sense and devotion to the men and women in the field.

[@anthonyryan9706]

Marshall petain wanted a fist up his arse...stupid boy

[@geraldleuven169]

The narrator accusing the Nazis for a lot of stuff our leaders today are guilty of as well.

[@phaultypmm]

I love that you are putting up all these documentaries. TY

[@samuelparker9882]

Phaulty something kinda new... refreshing!

[@arsenal-slr9552]

You'll love the source. kzbin.info/www/bejne/ioOUl4NuiduAY80

[@nova77791]

Actually the french tanks were equal in quality to the germans and more in number.

[@dominickhooks639]

I love watching documentaries, but it’s hard to follow them when it’s so clearly biased towards one side and uses terms such as “treacherous” for Germany and “defenseless” for Norway.

[@SkiddlyDoo]

Germany stabbed everyone in Europe in the back. Hitler constantly made false promises of peace while quietly planning for war. That's pretty much the definition of treachery.

[@hectorsantos3378]

Puré propaganda describing countries like Belgium and Holland as peaceful, ask their colonies about them : Indonesia and Congo .

[@jimmyarmijo2252]

The crazy things is, before WW1 the Kaiser was told France 🇫🇷 could be defeated in 5 weeks. Well we know now it took 4 years. The crazy thing is, it took Hitler 5 weeks to defeat France in 1940.

[@dinosaurus6858]

I think its 6 or 7*

[@jimmyarmijo2252]

@@dinosaurus6858 The debacle was actually decided in the first week. The battle had to unfold.

[@youtubehatesus2651]

this was extremely interesting. thank you

[@marcjohnson4385]

All German bombers did not get the signal to abort the Rotterdam mission

[@shaakirmirdha7222]

Literally me

[@stevenscoggins170]

40,000 armored vehicles attacking through the Ardennes? Bullsh*t!

[@bradpreece9942]

steven scoggins the French flew a reconnaissance flight and reported that the traffic jam was 10 miles long of military vehicles. The fine set in chief refused to believe it! Makes me very cross to this day. If they woulda been hit there with air attack, the war could have been drastically changed and saved so many lives.

[@jonathanpowell613]

That's exactly what the French first thought when they heard reports of German armor in the Ardennes.

[@mattw337]

The germans sent engineers and demolition experts ahead into the woods and they cleared paths, marked recommended routes, and laid out crude roads for a blistering advance through the forest. Speed was the key to the whole plans success.

[@stevenscoggins170]

At no point in the war did Germany possess 40,000 armored vehicles at one time, let alone push that many armored vehicles through the Ardennes.

[@charlynntaskar735]

Ask ike's men if any left?

[@johnlane5192]

Thanks

[@SunnyLovetts]

It’s amazing how many people were filming back then...

[@aaronm8143]

It’s amazing how people willingly went into full on battles with just a camera. Thanks to them we are able to learn from the past, and truly see how awful war is. They really are heroes in their own way. Hopefully this helps prevent us from ever having another all out world war again. If we were to it would make both the world wars look like a cake walk. Which is horrifying to even think about. Sadly it looks like China doesn’t care about the rest of worlds well being. They probably have no idea of the true scale of this war. Xi Jinping is already a Hitler 2.0 with his current concentration camps for the Uyghurs, and other none ethnic Chinese. Also what he’s done in Hong Kong is horrible. Sadly other nations can’t physically intervene without causing a war. Shit they killed 20 Indian soldiers over a border dispute, it’s amazing that didn’t cause a full on war with them, and India.

[@SunnyLovetts]

Aaron Mooneyham Yeah I agree, it’s truly amazing how many people filmed every aspect of the war! From Russia to Normandy and Japan etc. I agree China is very evil, but if we start a war with them it could end up being worse that WW2 unless we had literally every other country on our side. nuclear weapons could end it quickly but they are so bad for earth and indiscriminate. I don’t think the world is foolish enough to get into a WW3 though. Let’s hope I’m not wrong.

[@aaronm8143]

Angel Adriel I agree. I think the rest of the world knows better than another world war. China though I think doesn’t care. My only worry is them starting something. The thing is if they did, it would most likely be them verse the world. The only positive is India would be on our side so with their numbers, and our allies we’d at least have the numbers. Just thinking about a world war, and being drafted gives me chills. I was hoping the pandemic would of made the world closer, but of course it turned political due to the election in the states. I still think though when I’m old I’ll live in the world we have always wanted. Thank god we don’t live in the times of 1960s and under. War was literally normal. It’s amazing to think how savage humanity was, and still is in some parts of the world.

[@unitedwestand5100]

Churchill was begging in that speech. He knew Britain was bankrupt, couldn't stand by themselves, and was pleading for The US to come help.

[@rescuepetsrule6842]

Roosevelt thoroughly enjoyed making Churchill grovel, as he hated the man since a previous meeting many years prior. Disgusting to see his grudge against a man far better than him. And remember, Roosevelt didn't declare war on Germany when we entered the war- Hitler declared war on us.

[@Salem-TC]

Churchill popped the Champagne bottle on Dec. 7th-1941, Now the U.S. is in the war, he now knew it was over...

[@unitedwestand5100]

@@rescuepetsrule6842 ,. And then he prioritized Germany first! Everything done in the Pacific took a back seat. That's why the Marines were used so heavily. They fell under Naval resources. Churchill was weak in mind and guts. Roosevelt had to tell him that we were invading Normandy with or without them in June before he would commit. And then, if you notice, the Brits took the coastal path to Germany. That way they were never far from the coast and another Dunkirk type of evacuation. When you look at Monty's reaction to the battle of the Bulge that's evident. American troops covered the Northern flank of the Bulge while Monty fell back to the Muesse River in as a last resort attempt to limit the German advance. (Even that force was mostly Canadian.) Thank God we stopped them. Otherwise I think England would have evacuated back to their Island.

[@royscott9162]

@@rescuepetsrule6842 I’m fairly certain that a sitting President (in those times) stayed out of the fight in order to protect his country…Not out of a personal grudge.

[@rescuepetsrule6842]

@@royscott9162 Well, we all have opinions- it's not important enough to argue really. I just hate to see a man thought of as being all hero-he had motives.

[@luckysniper1659]

Imagine waking up and turning on the news and it says Germany has just taken over France.

[@AckzaTV]

Churchill is like "Im not gonna prophesize but heres a prophecy that will happen."

[@maxanderson9293]

45000 armoured vehicles, seriously ? who wrote this shit?! German panzer strength stood at just over 2000, the allies had more tanks than germany. This propaganda of the extreme variety, which soreads the myth that Germans had overwhelming superiority in arms which led to fall of France. It was allies with their colonies outnumbered the Germans by an enourmous margin.

[@markbossuah284]

45, 000 armored vehicles through the Ardennes, wow.

[@hugoh446]

Completely inaccurate. Guderian forces in the battle of Sedan comprised 60,000 troops, 22,000 vehicles -including 771 tanks- and 141 artillery pieces, supported by about 1,470 aircraft. Far from 45,000...

[@Petal4822]

Petain and his collaborationist Vichy government helped hunt down and send 70,000 Jewish people to their death. The French should be grateful to Britain, Canada and the US, for liberating their cowardly country. 🥸

[@luchyie4178]

57 dislikes? I thought this was a really good documentary.

[@REALChristiansareloving]

The dislikes are from people that wanted a documentary exclusively about the Fall of France.

[@CompagnonDeMisere25]

Its full of inaccuracies, there are much better documentaries around so there is no reasons to watch this.

[@kaimalino528]

@@CompagnonDeMisere25 By better you mean revisions of history by Germans who want to whitewash their past.

[@CompagnonDeMisere25]

@@kaimalino528 No, i mean factually accurate.

[@hugoh446]

@@REALChristiansareloving nope, this documentary has a number of historical inaccuracies. Just to mention a couple: Germany tank strength during the invasion was about 2440 or 2450 tanks, far from the huge figures mentioned in the video; French Somua tanks are shown as part of the German attacking forces, instead of the defending armored troops as should have been. There are quite a number of other glaring mistakes, inaccuracies and subjective interpretation of facts during the entire documentary.

[@rescuepetsrule6842]

You would THINK that after the Allies saw that the Germans could and did go right through the Ardennes with all the armor they would expect it later in the Battle of the Bulge. Even Hitler must have been surprised at how they caught us with our pants down.

[@WMalven]

It wasn't ignorance of the path, it was ignorance of the forces. The Germans had managed to conceal the existence of those divisions from the allies. This was largely due to the incompetence of Allied intelligence. They did have reports of the panzers' existence, but it was dismissed as not credible. Incompetence killed a whole lot of people in the war.

[@rescuepetsrule6842]

@@WMalven Yeah, those Panzers were ignored more than once, along with their numbers-look how Monty proceeded with his disastrous Operation Market Garden after Dutch Resistance had seen and counted them. A shame when leaders are too arrogant and confident to listen to the lowly grunts and locals.

[@richwilsey2881]

The fall of france???,it never stood!

[@dogheartsunspots2145]

The attack on France was one of the most brilliant military achievements of all time,even today the French haven't gotten over the shame of defeat😞😄😄

[@notorioussimcard6785]

Are you even french?

[@fugalarts2461]

This documentary seems very biased and skewed in favor of the Allies while in reality, Churchill was a very racist man who hated the people of India where they continued suffer from British Colonialism. The French were no better holding colonies in Indochina against the natives will (one reason for the Vietnam War). This documentary also seems to use the words “nazis” way too liberally. Nazi bombers, nazi engineers, nazi this nazi that, ect…In reality, there were many Germans who were drafted and forced to fight in the Wehrmacht. They had no choice but to fight and risked losing their loved ones at home. I hate it when people paint Germans as savage, evil and barbaric men. A lot of them were just average people caught in the crossfire of this terrible war. Pawns being used in the schemes of world leaders and officials.

[@kaimalino528]

History is always written by the victors. Given the choice I would prefer Churchill's racism to Herr Hitler's racism, any day. Let's not forget Germans voted the National Socialist Worker Party into power. They had a choice and they chose these monsters. If there is a lesson in all of these its the fact that the most cultured people are capable of the most evil atrocities.

[@miamigt4922]

Churchill, like each of us, is a person of his time. He was racist because most everyone was racist then. Our world has a different values system today which evolved out of war and hatred. Overcoming hatred in a greater percentage of our population compared to back that era. Hitler’s tribalist, ethno-nation model was defeated by global neo-liberalism. Churchill may have been a racist, but his words and actions helped build the much more mindful world we’re in today (when compared to our earlier history). We’re not finished working on it, but we are getting there. Churchill helped anti-racism in the long run in a manner I doubt he would’ve imagined.

[@h4rck04]

Leftist.

[@charlesvan13]

The British considered Africans and Indians people who needed to be civilized. Hitler considered other races subhumans to be exterminated.

[@tackywhale5664]

@charlesvan13 _That_ is the big difference, even in spite of how questionable (at the very least) the British ambitions can be considered as being.

[@BMLocal374]

Should’ve try to broker a peace with the allies then combined to fight Bolshevism. Declaring war on the United States was a horrendous blunder

[@slovell920]

No they got it right.

[@AM-nq5vn]

They did try, and Churchill refused since he knew that war meant a better economy for Britain. Look up how Hitler sent dozens of peace treaties to Churchill

[@indy_go_blue6048]

@@AM-nq5vn Hitler broke every treaty and promise he made between 1933-1939. Who the fuck was going to believe him? Even Chamberlain didn''t believe his lying ass after they invaded Czechoslovakia.

[@bleedinggumsroberts3579]

It appears as if these countries like "hay we'll let you in just as long as you let us pretend we are opposing you." And as far as this narrator is concerned, i think he would be more useful as a fictional story teller. He comes off with a bias tone and that is unprofessional.

[@wingedbunny6211]

I was going to use this to research for my French project but apparently it's really wrong so that's great.

[@wonderfalg]

Without finnish-sowjet winter war in 1939/40 the invasion of Norway is completely one sided explained. You could call it propaganda. Indy Neidel does a much better job in his WW2 series on KZbin. There were sllied plans to go to Norway, making norwegian iron supply to Germany impossible. Simply excused by helping Finland through Narvik. The difference was 6 hours. As norwegian King was informed being told "We are at war" he asked "At war with whom?" Also german breakthrough at Sedan was no weak point of french defense. Fortifications were fully equipped and completely built as planned Major error in 1940 was allied officers wanted to repeat 1918. General staff was uncapable in thinking modern war (except of de Gaulle on french side and all german generals). Stukas managed to destroy 2 bunkers only at Sedan. So how did they break through? Well, this is another story, which has filled books. By the way another neutral nation was invaded. Iceland. It was not Germany.

[@paulcarr8658]

Some of this is bullshit! 1. Your comment that French tanks were inferior to German, well the S35 and Char B had better armour and guns! The British Matilda II, scared the shit out of the Germans at Arras. 2. Some of the French and most of the British fighter planes were as good as the German 109. 3. The bombing of Roterdam, there was a message sent to cancel this bombing. 4. Gliders were used to land troops at the Belgium fort. 5. At Narvik, the Germans suffered heavy naval losses. 6. The French lost due to outdated military tactics!

[@Jim73]

"The Fall of France", and half way through the fall hasn't even started. I'd expect this of the History Channel, which I think we all know is garbage. Oh well, I was really interested.

[@SunSailandSand]

Pure propaganda garbage, I could not stomach it past 20 minutes.

[@esmenhamaire6398]

At 09:39, that is NOT a Luftwaffe bomber. It is an Italian SM 79; and Italy was not involved in the Norwegian campaign. Sloppy!

[@phillipdrake4371]

The speech by church hill around 38:00 is epic

[@JerkStoreAssistManag]

With less than 10 minutes focused on France, I think you need to change the title of this video.

[@lislisser6036]

32:11 Germans didn't have 45.000 armoured vehicles in 1940, the total number they prdoced untill may 1945, can be approx this number

[@joeguzman3558]

My father's brothers got killed there

[@cutiepotatoes92]

I don't know why people are complaining. This is all about how the Fall of France HAPPENED. Leading into the Fall of France. This was absolutely great.

[@cia1784]

Because the documentary was clearly Hating on the Nazis. I’m not saying The Nazis were Good but come on now if you truly researched proper history and not from hollywod you would find out that ww2 was not a war because of Hitler and him being a bad man, It was a war between Greed, Envy, Fear. The British and the french were jealous of the Germans and maybe hated them long after before WW2. And another thing is this here 0:58 churchill said “we tried again and again, to prevent this war.” Huh!!! dumb lies from that Pig. Hitler offered peace offer by peace offer before ww2 and during the end of 1942 while they were still in control. But all of the british people were brain washed by it.

[@keithkelso9872]

T try he nwo was behind it all

[@fathllahmassad3056]

Hi Kathryn

[@dgenereux]

specialized engineer battalions went in first lmao , it look like quite a few were plunging to the bottom lol ouch :D

[@rescuepetsrule6842]

That scene where the German falls off the hill at the end of the clip is hilarious! I wonder if he broke an arm...

[@spencerderosier6649]

This is the history channel I recall

[@kokolanza7543]

A stirring and tragic story, well presented in this documentary. Thank you. It does not seem to be the case, however, that Rotterdam was deliberately bombed after surrendering. Nonetheless, the bombing was a deliberate assault on civilian targets of a neutral country.

[@lewisdarne5852]

The German air force was recalled from bombing the city. But the message never got to them. Real history.

[@mahbubrabbani8816]

after world war 2, british had to leave many countries.

[@charlynntaskar735]

So did germany

[@dougrobbins5367]

Fuck off, pervert

[@thomasw4115]

That is exactly why they did not want to fight the war with Hilter in the beginning.

[@LexlutherVII]

Thanks to Germany😂

[@zach6395]

What's that first speech called, it's amazing. I've never heard it before.

[@grannysfamily8804]

The Nazis may have been evil. But they were far from stupid.

[@williamferguson6200]

@ 9:30 shows Italian SM-82 bomber.

[@kentpalmer9382]

This is a horrible propaganda film. Read the real history of the fall of France on Wikipedia.

[@skillz7119]

The rest of this series is well written and fairly neutral, but this episode is an absolute train wreck. Blatant propaganda and lies that are easily debunked. What a mess

[@salemnaeeri4426]

So good

[@fratersol]

Lies and propaganda here people.

[@marcjohnson4385]

Got some important facts wrong but some good footage

[@thesixfilms2734]

All I want to know in this video is the interpretation of all the things hitler was saying throughout the video

[@Sahiyena11]

I know there will be immaturity and cliché France jokes here in the comments somewhere so I'm gonna be the bigger person. Just like my Frenchmen I'm gonna give up on those jokes before they even appear. Surrender before the battle begins.

[@reidawg72]

The narrator failed to mention that Britain and France planned to occupy Norway under the pretext of assisting Finland. Whether you agree with Germany's reaction or not, a huge part of the narrative is missing. This is one-sided victor's propaganda.

[@arsenal-slr9552]

Source. kzbin.info/www/bejne/ioOUl4NuiduAY80

[@blurrymirror]

J.S. Reilly can someone tell me why towns are stratigec points

[@jamessnee7171]

One can tell right away that this was made during or right after the war. The sneering voice of the narrator gives it away. It is interesting to see what people were being told back then.

[@petshopboyspartnership]

You're part of the 1%.... The ignoramuses.

[@Mdriver1981]

So sorry to hurt your feelings.

[@danielplayz4421]

50:55 you mean 3 three states? Britain , Greece, and French Equatorial Africa

[@johansoons8413]

my granddad one of his best frends , living in the same city in belgium (lier) was actually a veteran who served on eben emeal fortress that was attacked in belgium. He was a machine gunner on top in one of the casemats. i know one thing, what u see in this reel , is a re en actment of the germans who highly propapagandised it. the fight itselve was offcoarse in favor of the germans, sertain with the gliders landing on top; But the fighting was brutal, on both ends, i know this from his personal account. may they all rest in peace. ps, my granddad was forced labour entire war during world war 2. they both hated war, all of there frends actually. but i loosened up there tungs, because i wanted to know, .... sertain the guy on eben emael , after years of asking, he told me, i will thell u only 1 time. and he dit... traumatised bye it til the day he died.

[@SilverBearAgAu]

Hi. New subscriber here. Notice: I found many of your playlists on mobile, but only a few on desktop. Just thought you should know that not all your playlists are viewable on desktop, such as the playlist this video is in "World War II Full Documentary Series"

[@rubenjames7345]

TD. Both misleading title and propagandistic treatment of what it does cover.

[@johnhopkins6260]

01:16 "...until the other side have had enough of it (next frame flashed to Chamberlain)": alluding to the idiocy of Treaty of Versailles 2.0... vs. Roosevelt "unconditional surrender!"

[@oceanhome2023]

In the thrust through the Ardennes you can see the very effective use of smoke more than I have seen in all of the other videos . Now I am wondering if they used it in other battles

[@indy_go_blue6048]

Certainly.

[@adamsmyth1156]

No mention of the Blucher indeed being blasted by those "silent" Norweigian Guns?

[@tlk0216]

why didnt England declare war on the soviets for attacking Poland?

[@BrigadierBill]

The French and British almost sent troops to Finland (although as an excuse to seize the Swedish and Norwegian iron mines that were supplying Germany, along the way), and also considered bombing the Caucasus oil fields due to Soviet oil sales to Germany. However, in 1939 they hadn't even made an effective move against Germany, and would be very ill-advised to turn the nonaggression pact between Germany and the USSR into an active alliance. Britain and France could only expect to win (given their existing strategy) by starving Germany into defeat as they tried in WWI, and putting Russia into the German camp would make that almost impossible. Britain hardly had any troops (a few hundred thousand in the BEF versus 3 million French troops), and their bombing raids consisted of leaflet drops. Moreover, they expected Poland to last a lot longer than a few weeks, just as Serbia, Bulgaria, and Romania had all persistently held out in WWI against far larger powers. Then the Germans managed to sink an aircraft carrier and a battleship in rapid succession, while the Graf Spee was raiding effectively in the south Atlantic. Italy and Japan were also pro-Germany and the threat of their joining the war meant the British were already likely to be badly-stretched trying to protect Africa, the Middle East, and Asia; adding the USSR to that potential coalition would have been a disaster, since even without actual deployment of troops that would likely deflect much sooner any Japanese aggression towards Russia (the Army wanted to invade Siberia) to the south, and supply the Axis with fuel (all of the Axis powers were badly fuel-starved during the war). In fact, the USSR could easily invade Iran and Iraq and simultaneously steal a major supply of oil from the Allies while massively-increasing their own supply. TLDR: Britain and France couldn't have beaten Germany backed by the USSR without US help, and with the threat of Italy and Japan couldn't risk overextending themselves as it stood already. Also the Allies were pretty tepid in their support for Poland as it was, failing to provide the offensive they had promised Poland to draw attention away towards the west (they advanced a few miles then turned around).

[@BrigadierBill]

@ Tl;dr: This puts France in an impossible question of either winning via manpower attrition (sheer casualties), or winning via economic attrition (starving Germany into submission, cutting them off from resources like oil). On the contrary, this would leave Germany with plenty of fuel and a vast source of resources even if the Soviets didn't contribute anything towards the actual conflict. Then consider the slight issue that France has a massive problem in the form of the French Communist party, which at this point is strongly anti-war in the first place (and has more support than is usual in Europe). The French considered themselves incapable of standing up to Germany in a protracted war without support throughout the 1930s due to their manpower shortage (Germany population recovered from WWI, France's did not). In accordance with that, the French had planned for a very long war that would starve the Germans economically, hence their reliance on the Maginot line and defensive tactics. In 1940, France had only 3 armored divisions (which were brand new) against at least 10 German, with most of their tanks being scattered as infantry support (and a disproportionate number being obsolete FT-17s leftover from WWI, as well as many being small slow infantry tanks rather than more modern vehicles like the Somua S35 or Char B1). Their airforce was also pretty badly outnumbered by the Germans in fighters, while having an outdated bomber force with little in the way of close air support (like Britain, they were hoping for strategic bombing to be a success; yet they hadn't put the same investment into it as the British had). The French reliance on relatively poorly-trained reservists also meant that a very small portion of their army would be reliable for offensive operations; in 1939 they weren't even ready for any operations, as they needed about six months to mobilize and train the reservists in the first place. Without British support, the French really can't afford to risk losing their reliable offensive units on attacks against just Germany. Remember that France had gone in guns blazing in WWI with Russia on their side, and faced more casualties in a month than the US lost in the entire war. Even had they been capable (and hindsight shows they likely weren't ready for either Germany OR the Soviets), their fighting spirit had been shattered in WWI. The only thing that pushed France to fight at all was the fact that a militaristic Germany posed an existential threat to them; the Soviets did not.

[@indy_go_blue6048]

Because by the wording of the agreement(s) with Poland, they didn't have to, according to the State Dept (whatever that ministry is called in GB.) So they didn't.

[@tlk0216]

@@indy_go_blue6048 And the USSR murdered all of the polish officers in cold blood at Katlyn, only in the early 1990s did they admit it. Poland should sue them for war crimes

[@indy_go_blue6048]

@@tlk0216 I'm not defending them, just stating the facts. Personally I think the western allies shouldn't let Germany and USSR destroy each other then picked up the pieces afterwards. Churchill had Stalin's number; FDR thought he could "handle him." It took Truman to finally stand up to him.

[@williamferguson6200]

Hmmm! I didn’t know that Italian Air Force took part in the conquest of Norway. A little more research perhaps? Ha! 🐻🤪😎👍🐶🥸🇨🇦

[@shughy1]

If all those soldiers could see the state of Europe today they'd wonder why they even bothered fighting to save it

[@gregorynasrallah1755]

They went north to beat the British and French there. German intelligence found out that they(the allies} intended to do so in order to cut off Germany's iron ore supplies but the Germans managed to get there first.

[@fratersol]

Gregory Nasrallah exactly

[@gregorynasrallah1755]

I've been researching this war for over 50 years. Now retired, I view many of these "documentaries" and it's hard to find one that considers the truth to be of much importance.

[@aetherkamado4757]

@@gregorynasrallah1755 jesus christ, you must be the god of ww2 holy shit 50 years, the amount of info someone one average can build up over such a large span is very fucking vast

[@willandrews9741]

How tall is that fellow at precisely 17:45?

[@bc-nv7co]

Will Andrews - PROB AVERAGE HEIGHT TODAY...

[@jammeswallmack5956]

I do agree this narrator is really annoying and biased

[@SeamHead33]

WW2 was Man vs. Evil and Man lost

[@psouth100]

Why do they call it the Fall of France of when happened in May and June?

[@arilieberman3547]

The French mindset was one of defense. The German was one of offense. The French were still fighting the last war while the Germans developed new tactics to fight the next war. French commanders were inflexible, timid and anachronistic. German commanders were bold, aggressive and imaginative. The German air force was far superior to the French. Finally, German communications and command & control were on a different level than the French

[@johnwright291]

Quislings name is used to this day to denote a traitor. Heard it just the other day.

[@kevint10121]

At 19:00 plus is a powerful togetherness that I wish we had here. A complete joke . Watch Hess. Epic teamwork raised as kids. It’s serious passion. Enough said.

[@thediaz07]

Honestly its extremely impressive how the SIZAN had gained such power and influence in a short period of time. The IZAN party gave the average German a sense of empowerment during a time of economic despair and world shaming of Germany.

[@dyadyaraizen]

Жаль такие документалки есть только на английском

[@fratersol]

Germany invaded the nothern states because britain was all ready on there way there to encircle and cut off valuable iron ore that was vital to germany survival

[@WMalven]

LOL!!! It wasn't "vital to germany survival," it was vital to the German war machine and HItler's plans for expansion and war...and the British were moving there, because of the German attack on Poland.

[@ronduck2812]

France world power 100 years ago maybe that's funny

[@joeguzman3558]

When I was in Vietnam I remember the fear of first combat but after a few days it's just anger agenst the enemy

[@wingledon2465]

There's a lot of bad info in this one, but it's probably because it's old.

[@user-qp7gb9ct6i]

“The road to victory is Belgium” -Hitler probably

[@DeMenteMinds]

I have an issue with your coverage of the bombing at Rotterdam. The Dutch surrendered AFTER the bombing, when the nazis threatened to destroy another city. Also, not 30,000 people died, that was a number thrown by allied propaganda to stir up sentiment against the atrocities, the actual number was around 1,150. Get your facts right. This inaccuracy alone is making me question the accuracy of the entire documentary.

[@oceanhome2023]

What is the name of the 1st German marching music played ?

[@franklinarchambault5397]

lily marlaine

[@thewarwickbear]

This is dreadful. Full of factual errors. Embarrassing.

[@rickylmoe5325]

I never could understand a man wanting to be called lord. I could never understand a man calling another man Lord.

[@hellboundrubber4448]

What a sham that the Nazis saw War as the only means for the German people to achieve greatness. And ironic Hitler is the worst thing to happen to Germans for all time. Left them stripped of everything. From this those people achieved greatness today.

[@naimshabiby5193]

The Germans were Superior in Warfare, they taught the Imperialist British and French the Art of War.

[@LexlutherVII]

UK would have been under Germany in some days if they were not an island

[@tonyroberts6500]

why didn`t all the French fleet support Britain ?

[@buku2008]

what a great documentary.thank you

[@allans7281]

When you see an American fighter jet screaming across your sky now you know what it symbolizes

[@maglardyful]

I don't understand the accent of the narration in the last 20 minutes of the video🤦‍♀️

[@lisalasoya6565]

Approximately 39:00 Winston Churchill launches the Counter city strategy, the science declares "that the one on the machine will get the credit" August 23 CO2 blood stream. And the woman navigator will be ♍ with family traditions. Not bad people.

[@teodytrinidad9497]

Enye

[@georgego7364]

The Germans humbled France and Britain. Karma for Britain and France colonisation of the Asian states

[@RYN988]

The language and the narration reeks of bias. Historical documentaries are supposed to be relatively neutral stating only the historical facts and not sounding like victor's propaganda. It's really off putting as I'm trying to learn more about WWII and I love a good documentary but this is really heavy handed!

[@adumbedgyname7158]

France did not fall during WWII at the hands of Germany. It fell during modern times at the hands of the EU.

[@ronaldsmith4153]

The British and French were equal in all numbers with Germany and were beaten in 3 days. After the Germans broke across the border and made one river crossing the situation for the Allies was hopeless. They had committed all reserves in Belgium and were out flanked. Dunkirk was not a Victory and it was made into the entire center of the most humiliating rout in History next to Singapore of course. This film is about propaganda. It shows how the Allies allowed the enemy to mass 3 Armies along the borders and not anticipate a War was coming. German troops were in lines 10s of miles long and there was no intelligence and no reconnaissance?? Incompetence lost the battle.

[@WMalven]

An astoundingly narrow analysis of Dunkirk. What was without a doubt a humiliating route and military defeat, was a victory in the strategic view. It's called a "moral victory." In rescuing those 340,000 men, they saved the core of the British army that would eventually return. To fight and defeat the Germans. In addition, the rescue of that many men when it was believed only 1/7 as many could be saved, was a major morale booster for the people. Had the people truly lost belief in the possibility of victory, defeat would have been inevitable. Your analysis of the rest is spot on, however. The French could have ended Hitler's expansionism at any time, simply by using their far superior army and armor.