- 17 Mar 2003 23:19
#197142
Yes it would. The Germans were thinking of crossing the channel to invade Brtain in an amphibian attack, but it was not possible with the RAF patrolling the channel, as it would have destroyed every boat going to Britain before they could even reach the British coast. So hitler decided to start an air battle to destroy the RAF, which they couldn't accomplish. Britain was a key element, with Britain under the Germans, all Europe would have been lost, and the USA would have to wage a war on two fronts, with Germnay on one side by the Atlantic, and Japan on the Pacific. Also, operation overlord wouldn't have taken place, it would be impossible to cross the Atlantic to stage an amphibian attack on Britain.
-My point is that, even if Germany destroyed the RAF (which was very
-difficult to acomplish, because the British wer thinking on redeploying
-their remaining fighters in the North, outside the range of German
-fighters, if things went too bad) they still woudn´t have enough ships
-to cross the channel, to keep the troops supplied and to escort the
-transports. They would be subjected to a massive attack by the Home
-Fleet and by the Bomber command and the Coastal command. The
-result would be a carnage, with massive losses for both sides. Even
-if they managed to cross the Channel, there would be a protracted
-guerilla war, and they would find their Stalingrad in London. It would
-be possible that an attempt to subdue England in 1940 could result
-in a earlier defeat for Germany.
I think that it was not a mistake declaring war to the USSR, the mistake was not taking Moscow while they had the chance. Because Hitler decided to take oil fields in the Caucasus before taking Moscow, so the winter caught them.
-Germany suffered 70% of her losses in East Front. Wasn´t it a mistake?
Wilhelm wrote:-Another mistake, but the detruction of RAF wouldn´t
-allow a decisive defeat for the British.
Yes it would. The Germans were thinking of crossing the channel to invade Brtain in an amphibian attack, but it was not possible with the RAF patrolling the channel, as it would have destroyed every boat going to Britain before they could even reach the British coast. So hitler decided to start an air battle to destroy the RAF, which they couldn't accomplish. Britain was a key element, with Britain under the Germans, all Europe would have been lost, and the USA would have to wage a war on two fronts, with Germnay on one side by the Atlantic, and Japan on the Pacific. Also, operation overlord wouldn't have taken place, it would be impossible to cross the Atlantic to stage an amphibian attack on Britain.
-My point is that, even if Germany destroyed the RAF (which was very
-difficult to acomplish, because the British wer thinking on redeploying
-their remaining fighters in the North, outside the range of German
-fighters, if things went too bad) they still woudn´t have enough ships
-to cross the channel, to keep the troops supplied and to escort the
-transports. They would be subjected to a massive attack by the Home
-Fleet and by the Bomber command and the Coastal command. The
-result would be a carnage, with massive losses for both sides. Even
-if they managed to cross the Channel, there would be a protracted
-guerilla war, and they would find their Stalingrad in London. It would
-be possible that an attempt to subdue England in 1940 could result
-in a earlier defeat for Germany.
I think that it was not a mistake declaring war to the USSR, the mistake was not taking Moscow while they had the chance. Because Hitler decided to take oil fields in the Caucasus before taking Moscow, so the winter caught them.
-Germany suffered 70% of her losses in East Front. Wasn´t it a mistake?