Dunkirk, Churchill, “Take no wounded…”

[amicus]

Dunkirk, Churchill, “Take no wounded…”


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

"...The British Expeditionary Force (BEF) was the British army sent to France and Belgium in World War I and British Forces in Europe from 1939 - 1940 during World War II. The BEF was established by Secretary of State for War Richard Haldane following the Boer War in case Britain ever needed to deploy quickly a force to take part in an overseas war. A senior German commander during the 1914-1918 war had called them a 'contemptible little army' - the name stuck and the BEF proudly referred to themselves as the 'Old Contemptibles'..."


This is not intended as a criticism, far from it; rather a writer’s curiosity as to what was going on in the mind of Prime Minister Winston Churchill as he directed the evacuation of Dunkirk, and made the decision to evacuate only the able bodied soldiers, leaving the wounded behind.

Even more than that, the complexities of the British and French forces manning the perimeter of Dunkirk, risked or sacrificed that other might live.

Although over a quarter million British and 90,000 French troops were evacuated, 40,000 British and 60,000 French troops were killed or captured at Dunkirk.

Many naval vessels were lost to German air attacks and thousands of sailors died.

One could search and discover the fate of those left behind, who either died or became prisoners of war, but that is not my interest.

In the decision making process, at that level, what goes into deciding to leave the wounded and sacrifice some to save others?

I do not doubt the humanity involved, just the decision making at the highest level, what did Churchill think and feel?

(I have been following the History International Channel and the continuing series, Dunkirk, from time to time and saw the final chapter this evening.)

amicus…

 

[Weird Harold]

In the decision making process, at that level, what goes into deciding to leave the wounded and sacrifice some to save others?

Wounded require more space than the healthy -- on average about 2.5 times as much space.

I suspect that fact alone would be sufficient to prompt Churchill's order with regard to Dunkirk -- for every two wounded, three healthy, combat capable soldiers would have to be left behind.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

The BEF was the British Army. It was being evacuated, but straight from the fire back to the frying pan. There was no indication the Germans wouldn't follow the geneva accords for treatment of prisoners. The men evacuated are going right back into defensive positions on the British mainland to stave off an invasion of the home islands. It only makes sense to take those who can go over to the defensive and contribute to the defense first.

An overview of British strategy prior to the World Wars i sinstructive as well. They usually used their small army in periphery engagements. You will notice that while Napolean was stomping the crap out of The austrians and russins, the BEF was fighting in Spain under Wellington against France. When you are a small nation, with limited manpower, you tend to apply your smaller army where it will do some good, but where it isn't at great risk. It had worked for them for a long long time.

Galipoli, during the first world war is a good example of this policy. Even if an example where it went bad rather than good.

 

[R. Richard]

Dunkirk, Churchill, “Take no wounded…”

In the decision making process, at that level, what goes into deciding to leave the wounded and sacrifice some to save others?

I do not doubt the humanity involved, just the decision making at the highest level, what did Churchill think and feel?

amicus…

In military medicine there is a procedure called triage. Triage is the seperation of the wounded into those who can be saved quickly and simply with the resources available and those who will be basically abandoned. Triage is not cruelty, it is reality. A three hour operation that saves one soldier could lose the lives of four other wounded soldiers. In war, resources must be used efficiently or defeat follows.

One of the most critical and least appreciated skills of a military officer at the general/admiral level is to commit men to operations where some of them will die in order that more other lives may be saved. It is not a fun task, but is an absolutely necessary one.

As to what did Churchill feel? At the time of the decision probably very little. Churchill had to make life and death decisions on a day by day basis. Such decision must be made quickly and decisively with the certain knowledge that some of the decisions will be wrong. It is after the decisions have been made and implemented that the reflection on what has been done occurs.

 

[oggbashan]

You can read what Churchill thought about it in his history of the Second World War.

There seems to be little doubt that the decision to leave the wounded was Churchill's.

The reality of the Dunkirk evacuation was that it would have been almost impossible to evacuate large numbers of wounded. Apart from the beaches, the Dunkirk mole was difficult for able-bodied soldiers to negotiate.

The original intention was that those evacuated would be returned to France beyond the German advance, say in Brittany or Normandy, to continue fighting with the French. The order was given to evacuate French troops alongside the British on an equal basis. In practice that was impossible because French commanders could not co-operate without orders they weren't given from their higher command.

Such French formations that were still in existence as fighting units and a small British rearguard fought on to the end to defend the perimeter while the evacuation continued. It is to their credit that they held on as long as they did.

The evacuated soldiers were in no state to return to France immediately. Some still had their personal weapons. All other weaponry had been left behind. They would have needed to re-equip before they could fight again. Before that could happen, France capitulated despite frantic efforts by Churchill and the French President to make France and Britain one country. If that had happened, France could not have surrendered while Britain was unconquered.

Some French troops were returned to France before the capitulation.

If the wounded had been given priority, Britain would have been effectively undefended after Dunkirk.

Og