Talk:Battle of Dunkirk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
September 5, 2009 WikiProject peer review Reviewed
WikiProject Military history (Rated B-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale.


French Commanders[edit]

I added the Commanders of the French 1st Army Group and the French 1st Army to the "Commanders and Leaders" section, as their forces were heavily engaged in the battle, it makes sense that they should be there.

"NPOV dispute - Fight back to the west"[edit]

The tone of this section does not conform well to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View. Rather than describing the facts, the piece tends towards cheerleading the alíes and mocking the Nazis, detracting from a historical understanding of events. Examples: "The leaflets showed a map of the situation. They read, in English and French: "British soldiers! Look at the map: it gives your true situation! Your troops are entirely surrounded – stop fighting! Put down your arms!" The Allied soldiers mostly used these as toilet paper."

"To the land and air-minded Nazis, the sea seemed an impassable barrier, so they really did think the Allies were surrounded; but the British saw the sea as a route to safety.[20][21]" What a glib characterization of what were genuinely complex, difficult tactical decisions. The bumbling Nazis did not regard the channel as impassible, they understood the concept of a boat. They were making decisions none of which were without risk, trying to pursue the retreating allies without overstretching themselves. Attributing the actions of each side to the German vs British character or the purported "air and land mindedness" of the Germans, who at this time were developing a powerful submarine fleet as they had in WWI, is needless embellishment for the sake of narrative. 184.152.36.186 (talk) 23:23, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

  • What specific revisions do you propose?—S Marshall T/C 07:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
It's both unlikely and unreferenced, so it should be removed. Duncan (talk) 18:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi! One question. Do we call the German Wehrmacht indiscriminately Nazis in this article? Wikirictor (talk) 02:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

We should not. Duncan (talk) 18:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Dunkirk spirit[edit]

I just redirected Dunkirk spirit to the pertinent section in this article. Please see Talk:Dunkirk spirit for my explanation of this update. I am open to further rearranging based on the ideal placement of this phrase based on the coverage. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 16:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Chance for Luftwaffe to demonstrate itself?[edit]

I also remembering read that Goering wanted to show that the Luftwaffe could destroy the British Army from the air in order to advance the argument that it would be able to do the same to London, increasing the chances of a surrender by Britain as a country. (Also that the Germans had reached the limits of their supply lines.)Historian932 (talk) 05:03, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Breakout the French Evacuated[edit]

123,000 of the total evacuated seem to be french can that be put in the battle box, seems a significant statistic? https://www.reseau-canope.fr/cnrd/ephemeride/1183

Beligerents[edit]

Is it not better to say British empire rather than the united kingdom? Furthermore, shouldn't the commonwealths (from which soldiers were present at the battle) be listed as belligerents as well, perhaps most notably British India, which had four companies present at the battle. There is no reason to omit them. Bodha2 (talk) 21:24, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

  • It's certainly true that troops originating from India fought bravely at Dunkirk. I would have concerns that if we included every nation who had soldiers present at the battle, then the list of belligerents would become too long to be useful, including as it would most European nations (except Vatican City and Liechtenstein), the many African nations that made up French colonial troops and the King's African Rifles, volunteers from the US and Canada, and as you say from India and Burma.—S Marshall T/C 22:45, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
    • I agree that an exhaustive list of colonial troops may be too cumbersome to list, however the info box could easily accommodate them by simply having a sub heading of "colonial forces" beneath the respective empires of Britain and France; with as accurate a figure of the number of colonial forces present, without having to individually list them. If this still is too tedious then perhaps instead of the United kingdom it should say British empire, and a similar treatment could be applied to France. I feel obliged to add that I am counting all colonial forces such as those from Canada and the like. From these two options I, however, prefer the former rather than the latter.Bodha2 (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
      • Although as far as I know not present at Dunkirk as units (v individuals), re your point above, Canadian, Australian, NZ and South African were not 'Colonial' but 'Dominion' troops; the difference being that they were ultimately controlled by their domestic governments (eg John Curtin's demand in 1941 for the return of Australian troops from N Africa). As an ex-Gurkha officer, I am well aware of the importance of the Indian Army in British victory in WWII, but the four companies of the Indian Service Corps present in France in 1940 would not have exceeded 450 men in total and most of the supply and logistics arms were evacuated from the Western France ports in late June in Operation Ariel, not Dunkirk. This is not to belittle their contribution but it's hard to identify a specific number of Indians evacuated from Dunkirk and if we're going to list them separately, that opens a big window - especially since some of the names of those recorded in the records as belonging to Force K6 are clearly Muslim and Bengali, so could be Pakistani or Bangladesh. So I think it's correct to use 'Empire' to cover these categories. Robinvp11 (talk) 18:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)