Hitler's Britain
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTy8yHXt7Q0

We sure have a lot to thank the RAF for :o

Brings to mind a 1964 film "It Happened Here", a dramatic representation of what Britain might have been like under Nazism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Happened_Here

This film is available on DVD. An interest facet of the film is how long it took to complete and the fact it was essentially a DIY production. Well worth the viewing...


<O>

Not to dismiss the RAFs actions in any way, but Sealion would have been an unmitigated disaster for the German military.

Rgr that...no air or sea superiority...bless the senior service :salute:

Indeed, and even if by some miracle they had managed to clear a path through Der Kanal, their choice of craft to cross one of the most treacherous waters in Europe was something more useful for crossing an actual canal.
And then there was the mustard gas we were waiting to drop on them when they came ashore, and the various Aux units waiting to sabotage supply routes and harass them.

Either which way, Sealion or Barbarossa, the poor Wehrmacht would be battered.

This is a good read in regards to Sea Lion and its impracticality:
http://www.philm.demon.co.uk/Miscellaneous/Sealion.htm


Oh, and here's a classic 'Axis Victory' film based on the Robert Harris novel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BUzxvrWNBY

Herr Hitler's insane idea to open three fronts not withstanding, at least he was smart enough not to invade Britain, even after Dunkirk. It would have been a logistical nightmare to say the least.:-?

But you surely see that Hitler was not interested in invading England. At least until England's declaration of war ? Thus he certainly had no real infrastructure and military for such a strike.

(Even Doenitz had said, remembering WW1: "Why does this have to happen just of all to me, again?")
Hitler was not interested in declaring war on England either, indeed he did not quite understand why England did it to him.

Because of Poland ? Why didn't England also declare war on Russia then ? After all, Russia and Germany had divided Poland between them, and was then attacked and invaded from both sides.
And what about what Russia did to Finland ? The winter war ? Didn't even US volunteers fight for Finland with Germany against Russia, before the english declaration of war?

Hitler had just hoped he would be able to get through with it, as with those other countries before. High stakes, but etc. blahblah..

Hitler's real and only plan was to wage war against the Soviet Union, and for that Poland had to be invaded for marching through - all else happened because of England's declaration of war, from Denmark, to Norway, to France and so on until to a world war.
[/devil's advocate mode]
:03:

Oooh, thanks! Had forgotten that I needed to watch that after reading the book. :salute:

the film has such a sad ending...

If you like the alternate history genre, Dick's The Man in the High Castle is a must read.


(can't wait for Sailor Steve's PM about inappropriate language :har:)

I liked this little nugget:
When the Marines decided that Amphibious Warfare was the thing to do just after WWI, the Marines realized there was no type of craft specifically to land troops and heavy gear ashore. So they said screw it we will just use the steam launches from cruisers and battleships to land everything: even tanks.

It is amazing the Marine Corps of the 20's was further along than the German Army of the 40's when it came to Anphib.

Just one by-product of the Nazi "leadership" being headed by political party lackeys rather than actual experienced, knowledgeable individuals who were more given to accomplishing a realistic goal than trying to please and satisfy the party and its leader. Sad that history has repeated itself since then in US involvement in Iraq ...


<O>

The agreement Britain had with Poland only covered invasion by Germany....
1. (a) By the expression "a European Power" employed in the Agreement is to be understood Germany.
If it was a country other than Germany then.....
(b) In the event of action within the meaning of Article 1 or 2 of the Agreement by a European Power other than Germany, the Contracting Parties will consult together on the measures to be taken in common.
So (a) gives, declare war. (b) gives, lets talk about it.

Well, when you consider that the German army has had little need for major amphibious operations across large bodies of water, and aside from the attack on the UK it would have very little need for it. Invading America would be a big no-no, so there's no need to build them for that, so it just wasn't developed. Small rivers and the like, the German army wasn't too shabby at fording, although obviously they preferred to capture bridges intact. But yes, Catfish is partially correct in that Hitler didn't expect, nor want, war with Britain, heck he had a partial respect for the Empire and its history, and Sealion was really just a half-assed effort to keep the German military busy and if the opportunity presented itself (very unlikely) then it would be ready for implementation, but primarily his mind was on Barbarossa and the Soviets.

That is interesting in that the Germans launched so may operations outside of continental Europe. They invaded Norway by sea which they did so following much of the Marines' doctrine from the 20's landing troops from warships via the ship's launches. They invaded Crete by air and went to N. Africa by sea plus a lot of their Baltic stuff. With the exception of Norway the Germans tried to have expeditionary warfare without amphibious warfare.

And yes the Germans were good at crossing rivers but look at the Western Allies, some of that anphib gear was great at crossing rivers like the LVT amtrak.

Oh, definitely, I'm not slating the Amphib quality of the Allies, particularly when you get to the island campaigns and the crossing of the Rhine. :yep:

in Hitler's War David Irving claims that it was Poland's fault that we were attacked in 1939.
I would copypasta that too if I could find the book.:88)

Too much here say, saw it years ago. Hitler Invades England & Russia and wins then Germany and America drop Atom bombs on each other...:rolleyes:

The only thing of real interest was the civil resistant groups.

One would imagine the first order of business in Nazi-occupied Britain would be to clean up the tens of thousands of dead Germans off the beaches, after marching seasick and tired into the murderous fire of a half million pissed-off Englishmen.

Of course, others have already pointed this out.

Don't forget we would have set the sea on fire as well, as I recall from another documentary that made the effort to examine sea lion and yes they would have paid a high price and failed, next Russia.

If a documentary is saying that British propaganda is fact, I wouldn't rely on it too much.

If the British really did have a big oil-pump in the channel that they wre going to set alight, then I guess the IJN really did have a dog that barked morse-code.

EDIT: What people criticising the documentary have to remember is that the Germans were winning the BoB before they started bombing London. If the Germans had established air superiority and captured Dover with Fallschemjager, the Germans would have a safe place to land their amphibious troops. The full might of the Luftwaffe would have been enough to make it a lot easier for the Panzers. If the British had sent warships, the Stukas, now safe from fighter attack, would've destroyed enough of them to protect the transports, while the rest of the Luftwaffe did exactly what it was made for: supporting infantry.

I do recall that there was a recreation where the British won, but that was only done under the assumption that the Germans hadn't gained air superiority. The RN cut off German supplies and the British army surrounded the Heer.