A what if.... Manginot Line

silverharp

If the French Maginot line had been completed would it have changed the outcome of the Western offensive? Would it have given time for the French to orgainise their armour better? would the line simply have been blasted apart from arial bombing. Was the whole concept of the line outdated WW1 thinking?

marcsignal

My guess is that the Germans would have concentrated Blitzkrieg tactics on the weakest point. Saturation bombing, the use of Commando forces, as in the Eben-Emael fortress in Belgium, and Paratroopers behind the lines.

They could have captured a few points in the line this way, and, in each case, opened a corridor to allow troops and heavy equipment through to cause havoc behind the French lines, and cut off supplies to the Maginot line.

Once this had been achieved, the fortress could have been attacked with Gas, pumped into the whole bunker system.

That's what I would have done anyway.;)

Tony EH

Unfortunately the Maginot line was doomed because it was a concept eminating from the stale strategy of WWI and just not suited to the mobile warfare of WWII.

In fact, it was indicative of the French High Command's lack of progression in stretegic and tactical thinking. It's personalities were a self congratulatory "old boys club", whereas the German's had had to start from scratch from a military POV and infused it's ranks with forward thinkers like Manstein and Gudarian etc.

In short, as Marc has already pointed out, a Schwerepunkt (or heavy point) would have been attacked repeatedly and the German forces would have poured through, attacking the static French from either side.

The Maginot concept was OK...so long as the enemy stayed put.

Delancey

Napoleon once said that '' the enemy who stays within his own walls is beaten '' .
The Maginot line was an out-dated concept that reflected French fear of offensive action , given the French relied on it for defence from Germany it has been argued that the Maginot line did more to protect the Germans !
The vast cost of it cannot be overlooked - how many motorized/armoured divisions could this money have equipped ? Colonel Charles de Gaulle ( as he then was ) protested on this very point but was ignored.

silverharp

I agree with the comments above , After watching a doc. about it last week I had just been wondering if they could have contained the offensive that maybe the French may have organised their armour etc. in a more useful way. But is seems logical that the Germans would have overrun the defenses.

FiSe

It wasn't entirely French thing to put concrete pillboxes into the ground to defend the country.
I think that quite a few nations had similar ideas, from top of my head: French, Belgians, Czechs, Dutch /?/

I wouldn't be an expert, but I think that the bunkers and fortifications were not designed to stop the enemy for good, but their task was to delay enemy advance - and cause as much damage as possible, in the process - so the defending army would have that extra bit of time to organize defences.

What I would say is, that if the Maginot line would last longer it could delay the fall of France, but I think that it wouldn't dramatically change the outcome of French campaign.

TerrorFirmer

The French had horrendous deficiencies aside from the Maginot line, regardless of how strong it could have been. Their use of Armour - decisive factor of the campaign - was decades behind that of the Wehrmacht, committing reserves piecemeal instead of a concentrated attack. One of the main reasons Dunkirk happened was because the Germans were afraid of a strong French counterattack from concentrated forces which never materialized.