What if the evacuation of Dunkirk had failed?

[Xx_Pro_State_Exam_xX]

Let's say the Dunkirk evacuation is a total failure. Very few (if any) British soldiers make it home and the rest are either captured or killed. What would have happened? Would Britain be knocked out of the war? Or would the brits fight on, but severely weakened?
And if Britain Surrenders, Germany can fully focus on the soviets.
If Dunkirk fails, do the axis win?
Hell, maybe operation sea-lion would happen, though I doubt that
(that plan was crazy and the nazis knew it)

Edit: dear god what have I done. Abandon all hope ye who enter this thread.

 

[naraic]

Let's say the Dunkirk evacuation is a total failure.

Please explain why and how.

The Dunkirk evacuation was sold at the time as a miracle in propaganda. It wasn't. Maybe the extent benefited from some luck but it would have taken a German miracle to make it a failure.

Or else pigs flying and carrying Luftwaffe bombs. If you get that then surely the same flying pigs can be employed elsewhere in the war.

Or would the brits fight on, but severely weakened?

Yes.

If Dunkirk fails, do the axis win?

No. Dunkirk failing won't stop the British from fighting. It won't make Sealion viable.

Hell, maybe operation sea-lion would happen, though I doubt that
(that plan was crazy and the nazis knew it)

Only if the Germans want to explore British and Canadian prisoner of war camps.

 

[Jacarí]

Please explain why and how.

The Dunkirk evacuation was sold at the time as a miracle in propaganda. It wasn't. Maybe the extent benefited from some luck but it would have taken a German miracle to make it a failure.

Nope, all the Germans had to do was to keep employing 1st and 10th PzDiv on the 28th to attack along the beach and take Dunkirk, instead of sending them south after a single day of combat.

That is it, the Germans could have bagged the whole lot.

At the time even Churchill was willing to reach a compromise peace, so I would venture this could have sent him over the edge.

 

[Michel Van]

if Dunkirk evacuation is a total failure
would weaken Great Britain army

And would Britain Surrenders ?
it depend on British Prime Minister
Halifax would have Surrender
Churchill will never Surrender

Dunkirk failure outcome for WW2 ?
Worst case senario: the USSR Red Army reach french coast in December 1945.

 

[Jacarí]

Churchill will never Surrender

“If we could get out of this jam by giving up Malta and Gibraltar and some African colonies I would jump at it.

...it would be best to do nothing until we see how much of the Army we could re-embark."

- Churchill, May 26th

 

[Giant Man Eating Rabbits]

Britain be knocked out of the war? Or would the brits fight on, but severely weakened?

1) They're be no surrender
2) The UK would be weaker, but only for a mere 12 months, . . . . if the Germans are lucky.

Why?,

The National Service (Armed Forces) Act imposed conscription on all males aged between 18 and 41 was passed on the outbreak of World War II. At the start of the conflict it stood at 1.1m and at June after the full of France you have around 1.65m men under arms.

Although not battle trained, you have trained man power that can easily defeat a German invasion . . . if they can get supplied with the weapons!

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Something to remember is that even after Dunkirk there were still 100,000+ British troops in France with more being landed that were evacuated when the French surrendered. Even if most weren't frontline forces they could serve as such in an emergency. Britain would not be left without an army to defend itself in 1940. Then as has been said there are large numbers of troops training in Britain itself. Short of bind panic there is no reason for Britain to seek terms in the summer of 1940.

 

[Jacarí]

Something to remember is that even after Dunkirk there were still 100,000+ British troops in France with more being landed that were evacuated when the French surrendered. Even if most weren't frontline forces they could serve as such in an emergency. Britain would not be left without an army to defend itself in 1940. Then as has been said there are large numbers of troops training in Britain itself. Short of bind panic there is no reason for Britain to seek terms in the summer of 1940.

This guy seems to have believed otherwise:

“If we could get out of this jam by giving up Malta and Gibraltar and some African colonies I would jump at it.

...it would be best to do nothing until we see how much of the Army we could re-embark."

"...if Herr Hitler was prepared to make peace on the terms of the restoration of German colonies and the overlordship of Eastern Europe."

"...that he would be thankful to get out of our present difficulties, provided we retained the essentials of our vital strength, even at the cost of some cession of territory."

- Churchill May 26th, 1940

 

[Elfwine]

This guy seems to have believed otherwise:

The one specifically stating this:
“If we could get out of this jam by giving up Malta and Gibraltar and some African colonies I would jump at it. But the only safe way is to convince Hitler that he cannot beat us.”

Italics mine, the words are Churchill's.

 

[Jacarí]

The one specifically stating this:
“If we could get out of this jam by giving up Malta and Gibraltar and some African colonies I would jump at it. But the only safe way is to convince Hitler that he cannot beat us.”

Italics mine.

SAFE.... but he would JUMP at the chance to settle the matter in that fashion, and he reiterated that:

"...that he would be thankful to get out of our present difficulties, provided we retained the essentials of our vital strength, even at the cost of some cession of territory."

"...if Herr Hitler was prepared to make peace on the terms of the restoration of German colonies and the overlordship of Eastern Europe."

This is what the politician actually said, as opposed to the propaganda he sold for years thereafter, propaganda that was debunked when the archives were opened decades ago.

But myths are myths, they die hard.

 

[Elfwine]

SAFE.... but he would JUMP at the chance to settle the matter in that fashion, and he reiterated that:

I want to see the full quotes before accepting those as indicating Churchill was interested in seeking peace terms as a matter of actual policy.

 

[Jacarí]

I want to see the full quotes before accepting those as indicating Churchill was interested in seeking peace terms as a matter of actual policy.

Feel free to reach the national archives then.

 

[Elfwine]

Feel free to reach the national archives then.

As it stands, we don't actually have any quotes establishing that Churchill saw this as time to seek peace. That is good enough for me barring something being introduced to show that the full quotes do in fact say that he saw this as such a time.

 

[Jacarí]

As it stands, we don't actually have any quotes establishing that Churchill saw this as time to seek peace. That is good enough for me barring something being introduced to show that the full quotes do in fact say that he saw this as such a time.

The best way to not find, is to never seek.

 

[alspug]

Context is very important. The evacuation from Dunkirk was sold as a miracle and in many ways it was. However the Heer was overstretched and the pause was primarily to hold the BEF as hostage to negotiate and even without it the numbers evacuated would have been at least 100,000 men. The French had prepared to hold the Germans to allow for the evacuation and indeed the rearguard was effective. The Luftwaffe was making life difficult but could not wipe out the defensive points.

Without major improvements to the distance the panzers can travel before needing maintenance and the mobility of the majority of the German Army that was walking or horse drawn the Germans paused at the limit of their logistics and pushing further is never a good idea as lack of support or fuel etc could cause major issues like for example a regiment getting isolated and wiped out or another Arras style attack.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Let's say the Dunkirk evacuation is a total failure. Very few (if any) British soldiers make it home and the rest are either captured or killed. What would have happened? Would Britain be knocked out of the war? Or would the brits fight on, but severely weakened?
And if Britain Surrenders, Germany can fully focus on the soviets.
If Dunkirk fails, do the axis win?
Hell, maybe operation sea-lion would happen, though I doubt that
(that plan was crazy and the nazis knew it)

The niggling issue with Dunkirk failing is that it involved fighting through the BEF which included all of the Pre war regular divisions and 5 of the better TA divisions as well as half of 10th Army

Its unlikely that all 200,000 evacuated British troops at Dunkirk would all be lost - nearly 8,000 were evacuated on the 27th and 17,000 on the 28th

However even of all the rest were lost - unlikely it may seem - why would Britain surrender?

Its Navy and airforce are very much intact

And its army was on 1st June 1940 OTL 27 infantry Divisions strong and numbered 1.5 million men

So even if the majority of the 10 Divisions of the BEF were destroyed and most of those 200,000 troops captured that is still 1.3 million men.

The major loss would be in the loss of the 5 Pre war regular divisions and 5 better TA divisions

But if we look at the one Division that was lost in France the 51st 'Highlander' Division - this rebuilt unit (using the new TA 9th Division) had a terrific reputation fighting in 2nd Alamain, invasion of Sicily, Normandy to the Surrender of Germany.

So there is no reason to believe that the destroyed units would not be reformed in the same fashion as the 51st was?

So no Axis do not auto win.

 

[Elfwine]

So there is no reason to believe that the destroyed units would not be reformed in the same fashion as the 51st was?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the main downside - besides the very immediate too short term to actually exploit because the Channel is in the way sense - for losing the pre-war regular divisions is more the long term professionals will be missed in getting units like the new 51st in fighting trim?

As in, that would be noticed, even if it wouldn't be irreparable.

 

[thevird]

The oldest question in the book. Before more people come here and scream how much they hate the forbidden mammal, here is what WOULD be needed for an Axis Victory if Dunkirk fails. Lord Halifax would need to be spooked into preventing Churchill from gaining the Ministership during the fallout of Chamberlains' death, and taking it for himself, as Chamberlain originally intended. Halifax was a pro-peace politician, even wrote to Hitler and came up with a proposal, and so maybe, MAYBE, negotiations bear fruit and a peace deal is signed, with the UK condemning France to its fate. Of course, this would doom Japan once Pearl Habor happens, Germany winning in the west doesn't change the embargo, and would make Stalin throw a hissy fit, as now the inevitable war between the Soviets and Reich is now the most likely next showdown. Who wins that and who even starts it is up in the air. There.

 

[thevird]

Sealion isn't happening. The end. Roll credits.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the main downside - besides the very immediate too short term to actually exploit because the Channel is in the way sense - for losing the pre-war regular divisions is more the long term professionals will be missed in getting units like the new 51st in fighting trim?

As in, that would be noticed, even if it wouldn't be irreparable.

I would agree with that.

I mean it would not be insurmountable and in some sense more positions would be filled with newer men more capable of learning without 'unlearning' first.

But yes a net negative.

The biggest loss would be the senior Divisional and corps commanders lost along with senior staff officers.

This might include Alan Brooke and Monty among others.