+3 votes
118 views
in Miscellaneous ♑ by

In July 1940, Winston Churchill had only been Prime Minister 54 days when he gave the order to fire on the French fleet in the Algerian port of Oran. 1200 Frenchmen killed, many 17-19 years old, allies who just weeks before had helped the British evacuate from Dunkirk. Here is what happened:

The French government had quickly surrendered to the German blitzkrieg invasion, and Churchill worried Germany would use the superb French Navy to invade Britain. The French Admiral Darlan promised he would scuttle the ships rather than allow the Nazis to take them; Churchill did not dare trust that. 

OUTCOME:

1. The House of Commons, who Churchill feared would censure him, instead cheered him - as did the British people.

2. FDR had been hesitating to help England because he feared Churchill would not fight; so FDR was going to let England go down and defend the US homeland instead. After Oran, FDR decided to send England battleships and other aid all-out; Churchill had shown his mettle.

3. BUT a few months later, when the Nazis approached the few remaining French ships, the French DID scuttle them...as promised. No French ships ever went to the Nazis.


3 Answers

+4 votes
by

Churchill really had no other choice. The addition of the French fleet to the Kriegsmarine would have seriously hampered the much needed flow of materials to Britain at a time when she was on her own. It would have given the Axis powers complete control of the Mediterranean and Rommel and the Italians would have easily reached Alexandria and Cairo and closed the vital Suez canal. Let alone having even more commerce raiders. War is like that where innocents are killed for a decision of this magnitude. Many Frenchmen never forgave Churchill for this action and rightly so as they were so proud but it was the right decision at the time.

Any of those ships entering the Atlantic or Indian oceans would have been disastrous.

by

I thought you would prolly know about this already Rooster! You know SO much about WWII.

You know as horrible as it was, I ended up feeling the same way after watching the video...Churchill had no real choice but to do as he did...

by

Yes he did the right thing at the time. Those ships would have been a disaster for the Allies.

+3 votes
by

I think Churchill had to do what he did.  How could he risk the fate of Britain on the word of one man, Darlan, to scuttle the French fleet if necessary? True, the French did indeed scuttle their ships at Toulon, but by that point, they had two reasons to do it. (1) To prevent the ships' seizure by the Nazis, and (2) to prove Churchill had been wrong at Oran.

I have nothing but admiration for how tough Churchill was. A lesser man might have had a nervous breakdown at the situation in those days: disastrous defeat at Dunkirk, rebuffed by Roosevelt (who was running for re-election as a peace candidate who would keep America out of European wars), the French fleet at risk of falling into Nazi hands...

But still, Churchill gauged the political situation in Britain correctly: his decision was cheered in the House of Commons and by the people in general.

Later, when referring to de Gaulle, Churchill said, "The heaviest cross I had to bear was the Cross of Lorraine," so dealing with the French leadership was never easy for him.

by

Posting this question itself seemed to bring me to that same conclusion, OtherTink...thank you for insightful comments.

Thinking it over later, one factor I saw in the YouTube was perhaps some ego; the French commander on a ship at Oran was insulted that the Englishman send to mediate with him was a lowly ship's captain, at first refused to receive him.

Next thing you know, 1200+ dead. I do wonder how much one person's insulted ego contributed to that decision it truly does seem Churchill had to make?

by

@ Virginia:

Yes, I think ego played a role.  The French commander, Admiral Gensoul, should have used his head, and realized that his ships were sitting ducks. Or perhaps he thought the British were bluffing. Or perhaps he thought complying with the ultimatum was dishonorable, no matter what the cost. Or perhaps the situation was just too much for him.

by

ty, Other Tink

by

YW, Virginia!

+1 vote
by
by

Marianne, you are a powerful researcher...I still do not understand fully all about the Vichy government, but still learning slowly, here...more and more.

Thank you.

by

You're very welcome, Virginia.

There are always different versions in history, and many cases are much more complicated than they look, as various "interests" and aspects must be considered, and there will always be hidden parts, grudges and unheard voices.

All of us are learning from each other, and certain "evolutions" and problems on your side are also complicated for Europeans.

Besides varying mentalities and attitudes, there are also these different definitions and interpretations between British and American terms, which caused and still cause misunderstandings.


by

Marianne, yes! ...the inexplicable vagaries of communication...

* Late addition: Just want to acknowledge the place where you say, "all of us are learning from each other"...something very powerful and meaningful there...

by

Lol - I nearly missed your answer, Virginia.

Perfectly said - I agree with you.

:)

Is this page not working?

Click here to see the recent version of this page

...