U-Boats cost Germany WWII!

[joea]

Originally Posted by DavyJonesFootlocker

U-boats lost the war? No, sir I disagree. Yes, you have many valid points which I agree with but WW2 was not a one-dimensional war. Hitler's mismanagement and the attrition rate when up against the USSR and USA. I think his greatest blunder was war with the soviets. They hand a non-aggression pact signed up. The Ost Front War bled Germany dry. If Japan had agreed to attack the Russians when Hitler invaded the East in 1941 things may have been different. I have no respect for nazis. My father was with the RAF and things he saw made him fight on. I just wish he had sent a u-boat to the bottom of the Caribbean Sea.

I'm just glad the allies knocked the stuffing out of the bad guys.

Yup, the figure thrown around is 80% of German casualties were on the Eastern Front. True not 80% of u-boots sunk, but Germany put most of its resources into the Heer (and the Luftwaffe) not the Kriegsmarine.

[Gino]

Comparing the war in the Atlantic with the war in the Pacific is like comparing apples with pears. Both are fruits...

Don't forget that the U-boats started the war in a highly unfavorable position. Doenitz asked for 300 U boats, so he could have 100 of them on station all the time. With the Wolfpack strategy he designed, and with that number of U boats, the war with Britain would have ended in only a couple of months. Doenitz was well aware of the possiblity of the US coming into the war against Germany.
Had he had the 300 boats he would only have had to finish the UK off, before the US entered the war. Mind also that in the US just before the war there was a lot of sympathy for the Germans. So going to war was not easy for Roosevelt.

In the Pacific the US only started using Wolfpacks at the end of 43, beginning of 44 (not sure about the date) so, three to four years after the Germans had already shown that it worked. Bureaucracy was the main reason why the US submarines took a lot of time to do the great job that we now know they did.
Also the US had a great advantage with the Japs, they could read their code already before the war. Had they not been able to do so, then the outcome in the Pacific would have been more costly and much later.

In both theaters one thing stands out as the major mistake: Both nations, Germany and Japan, didn't have a chance to win the war. From the moment Germany invaded Poland it was only a matter of time. Anyone that believes that Germany as well as Japan could have won the war is utterly wrong. The Nazis were a bunch of crooks that manipulated the Germans into war, at a tremendous cost and grief.
For Japan the end was inevitable when the US started to boycot them because of Mantshuria. By using old fashioned ideas of the Big Battle at Sea, they hoped to lure the US in to peace negotiations...

Luckily the current governments don't think and act like that...:hmm:

groetjes

[-Pv-]

Well Said Gino! Ultimately, it's the corruption at the root which leads to bad decisions which leads to failure, however confusing or temporarily successful the process in between.
-Pv-

[CaptainHaplo]

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.