The Worst Miscalculation Of World War II

Started by tbone0106, June 24, 2012, 09:52:40 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

TboneAgain

Quote from: Goose on June 19, 2014, 02:28:43 PM
How about Germany's failure to press the offensive in Britain.  What do you think the possible ramifications of German occupation of England would have been to the tactical and strategic prosecution of the war?

The US could have still entered the European theater from Africa through Italy, but without England D-Day could not have happened.  All the forces that were tied down for so many years guarding against the threat of an invasion into France could have been deployed to block forces in Italy and prosecute the war in Russia, possibly with greater effect.

I think that coupled with the invasion of Russia at the very least, ended the war 5 or more years earlier than it might have.  The only way it may have ended earlier would have been capitulation and German ownership of Europe and North Africa at least.

I'm not sure how you're defining "failing to press the offensive in Britain." The only offensive there ever was was the Luftwaffe bombings, plus the more generic submarine warfare in the Atlantic. Goering and his Luftwaffe "pressed" that pretty hard, but came up short.

The Germans started well, using their 100% tactical air force to achieve tactical goals -- eliminate the radar stations, shoot down lots of defenders, and bomb hell out of the airfields. But then orders came down from on high that a shift to bombing cities must be made, the "Blitz" began, and the whole thing unraveled. The Luftwaffe failed to achieve strategic goals because it had no strategic bombers and no strategic mindset. I am in no way trying to minimize the suffering that took place during the Blitz in London and surrounding areas, but compared to the REAL strategic bombing that took place later, when American and British fleets of 1,000+ heavy bombers blanketed German targets with tens of thousands of bombs in a single raid, the German raids on London were pinpricks.

The entire German war machine was built around the principles of blitzkrieg -- lightning war. (One ridiculous example of this mindset is the edict from Hitler that EVERY plane fielded by the Luftwaffe -- even the world-beating Me-262 jet fighter -- had to be capable of dive-bombing.) England was simply too remote and too well protected for blitzkrieg to succeed. Operation SeaLion, the German plan to invade England, depended as a precondition on mastery of the air, and the tactically masterful Luftwaffe could never accomplish that strategic goal. When the German losses during the Battle of Britain reached the point of nearly no return, Hitler had no choice but to cancel the whole thing and depend on his hold on Western and Northern Europe to keep the British at bay. That idea actually worked for more than three years, long enough for his forces to meet rolling defeat on his eastern and southern fronts.

To say that "without England D-Day could not have happened" is just silly. D-Day came about because it obviously COULD happen. Had such a scheme been an impossibility, for example because of the absence of England as a base, something else would have happened. D-Day itself, as it came to be, was not an inevitability or a requirement for victory. It was a thing that was done under the circumstances at the time. Had England been conquered, no doubt we'd be celebrating some other event, no less magnificent.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -- Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; IT IS FORCE. -- George Washington