What a discussion!
First of all, lets get the obligatory out of the way - the ruling regimes in the Axis forces were the cause of the war, and the root foundation for the outcomes as well. Their ascent to power is viewed properly by history as a cost to humanity that can only be called a criminal calamity of huge proportions.
Uboat crews were Nazi's... This is historical fact. I can say it because I understand it. This does NOT mean that they believed the rhetoric - its a reflection of the society at the time. To be in Germany, as a German, during that time frame, you simply were a Nazi. With the brown/black shirt goon squads roaming - to not be a card carrying, dues paying member - well - my grandfather had a gun to his head when he was asked whether he was a member of the Nazi party..... a wrong answer meant his brains exited his cranial cavity, and he had a family to care for. I don't disrespect his choice in answering.
Yet very few people in Germany truly followed the rhetoric in their hearts. So I still honor the sailors and ordinary "joe's" who went out and did what they saw as their duty, not for Hitler or Hirohito or some party line, but because they loved their country.
Now to the discussion itself. The uboats did not lose the war for Germany. Not unrestricted submarine warfare, because sinking neutrals that were carrying supplies to the island nation of Great Britain was a necessary evil. If one wishes to fight a war and win, you cannot pull punches. As is often said - He who is the friend of my enemy is my enemy, while the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Countries were warned not to supply England, and that doing so put their ships at risk.
One flaw that comes from this mathematical what is built vs what is sunk comparison is that its not the weight of what is sunk, its what is sunk itself that matters. All the freighters making it thru carrying tanks and trucks and toilet paper dont matter a bit when an island must have the fuel and ammunition to drive and fight them, or the food that is required to feed their population.
The original arguement claims that the uboats failed to pack enough "punch" to stop convoys. BdU agreed, which is why the wolfpack concept became a major effort. One Type VII may not do much - but three or four hitting a convoy could decimate it - as happened more than once.
The Uboat war did not doom Germany. If anything doomed the "Battle of the Atlantic" for Germany, it was her ally, Japan. In attacking Pearl Harbor (which Germany had no knowledge they were going to do), they forced Germany into direct conflict with America. Up until that time, US hulls were being sent to the bottom and existing US escorts were used through the lend/lease program, but little resource was put into modernization/R&D of ASW since the war was undeclared. Once war was declared, ASW in the Atlantic took on a greater priority, and thus began the technological race that ultimately the U-boats lost. While the Battle of Britain became a tactical blunder, and thus hindered Operation Sea Lion, it was the decision to delay indefinitely Sea Lion itself due to lack of full air and sea control that created in High Command (aka - Hitler) the need to lash out toward another target - that being Russia.
While I could go on and on - like how both Stalin and Hitler knew that the Non-Aggression Pact was a farce (Stalin also had plans to invade Germany) there truly is not a "single" thing that caused the outcome of the war as a whole - it was the sacrifice of so many on the various fields of battle that did that - and for that we all can be thankful. I will also add that there are a few times it appears that divine intervention may have helped.
I also appreciate the tone this has - so far at least - been carried in. Well done to all for an interesting, thought provoking discussion with class.
__________________
Good Hunting!
Captain Haplo
|