>>492511>I said "by 1948">Make this guy into the French president by 1938.I'll just assume it's a typo.
No. Even with proper defenses in the Ardennes, there was no way we could have won for several reasons:
1. Unlike all majors country in ten world, we still didn't get by this time the concept of mobile warfare: whereas Germany, the UK, US and USSR understood the real potential of motorized and mechanized troops, supported by tanks and potentially aviation, we were still convinced that battles were centered about infantry only, and therefore did not create independent motorized units, capable of counter-attacks, breakthroughs and breakthroughs exploitation. To put it simply, we would have been stuck in a defensive role only, and we would never have been able to take the upper hand.
2. France's birth rate was vastly inferior compared to that of Germany, and their population was higher: this meant that, even with proper technique, the Germans would have had the upper hand and defeated us. After all, number is still the deciding factor when all things are taken into account...
3. Our military industry was inferior to that of Germany, and with the gains made by the Reich in 1936 and 38, the gap only widened. Democracies can't keep up with the government planning in that area, and our production would not have been enough to fight back.
It is true that in 1933, Germany was extremely weak, but at that time, France was isolated from the rest of Europe, as our cocky behavior already made other countries wary of us. Such an early reaction would have gotten us into big trouble, probably at war against the UK.
