ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags World War II history

Reply
Old 13th February 2018, 04:35 PM   #521
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That's what Chamberlain thought and believed in 1938, and to my mind with good reason. War could have broken out in 1938. The verdict of history is that Britain was not ready for an aggressive war by Germany in 1938. Chamberlain gave a guarantee to Poland in 1939 which meant war, however weak Germany was at the time. That's not appeasement.
That's still no answer how Britain ever was going to lose the war in a week. How would the Germans in 1938 invade Belgium, rush to the Channel coast, cross the Channel and capture London, and that all within a week time? With Britain being an island, that is the only realistic interpretation of "losing a war".
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 04:52 PM   #522
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
This one's curious from that page:
Quote:
Also, Kristallnacht in November 1939 had made people realise that Hitler was evil.
Of course, that should be 1938. It looks at first like a typo, when you look at the surrounding text, were it not that it happens twice on the page in different sentences.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 01:05 AM   #523
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That's what Chamberlain thought and believed in 1938, and to my mind with good reason. War could have broken out in 1938. The verdict of history is that Britain was not ready for an aggressive war by Germany in 1938. Chamberlain gave a guarantee to Poland in 1939 which meant war, however weak Germany was at the time. That's not appeasement.

There is some background to this at this website, which I admit may not be the pure unadulterated historical truth, but which does not defy logic or common sense:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher...se/revision/2/
No, you are the one claiming Britain would capitulate within a week.

Please stop obfuscating and explain how this would have happened.
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 01:06 AM   #524
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
This one's curious from that page:

Of course, that should be 1938. It looks at first like a typo, when you look at the surrounding text, were it not that it happens twice on the page in different sentences.
Its amazing how Hitler literally set out his manifesto in Mein Kampf but people only realised he wasn't a very nice person after <insert Nazi atrocity here> happened....
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 02:52 AM   #525
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,673
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
My reason for thinking France doing better really rests on two things. Firstly that the USSR enters the war and this prevents them concentrating their full weight in the west.
Well, that involves someone else joining in the war (eg Poland).
Otherwise what can the Soviets do apart from aircraft?

Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
Secondly that courtesy of Czech campaign the German armoured spearhead would be far weaker and the historical version of Case Yellow would either not happen (the Ardennes stroke only got adopted in February 1940, it faced a lot of resistance) or would have a much higher chance of failure.
This, though, is the big question.
Would the narrow thrust have happened (or some other similarly ambitious strategy)? And if it did, would the tanks be up to it? Considering the armoured thrust was only stopped (essentially) by logistic issues then it would be a reasonable assumption that one conducted a year earlier and with a more threadbare force would be forced to halt sooner.

Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
Nothing's guaranteed of course but I think the French chances would have been better in a 'Munich War' than what happened historically.
And, something that's just occurred to me, would Germany have gone for Norway in this scenario?

Indeed, could Germany go for Norway?
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 03:11 AM   #526
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,586
Britain would have ended up like Holland and Denmark and Norway and Belgium in 1938. You must be too strong to be attacked, which Chamberlain understood, but not Churchill.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 03:48 AM   #527
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,829
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Britain would have ended up like Holland and Denmark and Norway and Belgium in 1938. You must be too strong to be attacked, which Chamberlain understood, but not Churchill.
HOW? How would German military cross that Channel? Where the hell would they even get resources?

There are so many things wrong with your statement...
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 05:22 AM   #528
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,623
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Britain would have ended up like Holland and Denmark and Norway and Belgium in 1938. You must be too strong to be attacked, which Chamberlain understood, but not Churchill.
Germany didn't have any way to get and sustain forces across the Channel after taking out Holland, Belgium and France in 1940, let alone in 1938.

We get it, you don't like Mr. Churchill.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 09:18 AM   #529
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,586
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
Germany didn't have any way to get and sustain forces across the Channel after taking out Holland, Belgium and France in 1940, let alone in 1938.

We get it, you don't like Mr. Churchill.
To my mind a lot would have depended on the air war in 1938, and the RAF had practically no Spitfires in 1938. It must be remembered that London was heavily bombed by the Germans even in the First World War which is now largely forgotten. If the RAF had been made non operational in 1938 by the Germans a cross-channel invasion would not have been a really opposed landing. general Alan Brooke was worried about a German parachute landing in the London parks and other places in September 1940 and he was honestly expecting a German invasion at any moment then, though the British public and House of Commons were not told that information at the time:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/w...f-Britain.html
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 09:31 AM   #530
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,723
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
To my mind a lot would have depended on the air war in 1938, and the RAF had practically no Spitfires in 1938. It must be remembered that London was heavily bombed by the Germans even in the First World War which is now largely forgotten. If the RAF had been made non operational in 1938 by the Germans a cross-channel invasion would not have been a really opposed landing. general Alan Brooke was worried about a German parachute landing in the London parks and other places in September 1940 and he was honestly expecting a German invasion at any moment then, though the British public and House of Commons were not told that information at the time:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/w...f-Britain.html
Heavily? Not really. Best source I can find is 123 tons of bombs from planes (maybe twice that from Zeppelins) over all of the UK. As compared to 30,000 tons just on London during the blitz in ww2. That doesn't include later raids and V weapons.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 14th February 2018 at 09:32 AM.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 09:39 AM   #531
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,673
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
To my mind a lot would have depended on the air war in 1938, and the RAF had practically no Spitfires in 1938. <snipped to below> If the RAF had been made non operational in 1938 by the Germans a cross-channel invasion would not have been a really opposed landing.
We've been over this. There was no chance, even with the RAF out of action in 1940, of the Germans getting across the Channel and getting a beachead they could actually keep supplied. There was even less chance a year earlier.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It must be remembered that London was heavily bombed by the Germans even in the First World War which is now largely forgotten.
People do know of the bombing raids in WW1. The 100th anniversary of the first on in 1915 was in the news. However, "heavily bombed" was really not the case.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
general Alan Brooke was worried about a German parachute landing in the London parks and other places in September 1940 and he was honestly expecting a German invasion at any moment then, though the British public and House of Commons were not told that information at the time:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/w...f-Britain.html
And we've been over Brooke's parachute fears.
And in this case, since we're talking a war starting in 1938, the 1st Parachute Division was only formed in October of that year.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 10:05 AM   #532
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,829
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
To my mind a lot would have depended on the air war in 1938, and the RAF had practically no Spitfires in 1938. It must be remembered that London was heavily bombed by the Germans even in the First World War which is now largely forgotten. If the RAF had been made non operational in 1938 by the Germans a cross-channel invasion would not have been a really opposed landing. general Alan Brooke was worried about a German parachute landing in the London parks and other places in September 1940 and he was honestly expecting a German invasion at any moment then, though the British public and House of Commons were not told that information at the time:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/w...f-Britain.html
Market garden would like to have a word with you. Or Dieppe.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 10:22 AM   #533
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 21,140
Even without an RAF in 1940 the Germans wouldn't have made a successful landing.
They were relying on strings of barges towed across at night.
Their plan relied on the RN not interfering at all and after a landing still not interfering with the barges as they were towed back across the channel to collect supplies.
There was no provision for landing armour, artillery, transport (other than motorbikes) or stores. No specialist landing craft and no naval gun support.
The plan was that once ashore they would capture a large port intact to bring in ships with artillery and armour.

In the 70s the remaining commanders from the German and British forces that would have been involved in Sealion took part in a wargame at Sandhurst.
They gamed the landings and the aftermath.
To help the Germans the RN wasn't allowed to interfere for 24 hours after the first landing on the beach and the Luftwaffe were given air superiority.

All the south coast and channel ports were blocked and immobilised within hours of the fist landing.
German troops made some progress inland from the beaches but without armour and artillery or any naval gunfire support they made little headway towards their objective ports.
RN ships arrived in among the barges and their tugs just as they were returning to their embarkation ports to collect supplies and second wave forces and they were obliterated.
After a few days of fighting the surviving Germans surrendered.

In reality the RN would have been in among the invasion barges as soon as they left port and tried to form up.
RN Destroyer sweeps regularly patrolled right up th the French coast right down the Channel and even in to some of the ports to shoot things up a bit.
Hundreds of barges assembling at sea and wallowing behind their tugs at 3 or 4 knots would have been destroyed before they even got away from the coast.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 10:32 AM   #534
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,768
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Even without an RAF in 1940 the Germans wouldn't have made a successful landing.
They were relying on strings of barges towed across at night.
Their plan relied on the RN not interfering at all and after a landing still not interfering with the barges as they were towed back across the channel to collect supplies.
There was no provision for landing armour, artillery, transport (other than motorbikes) or stores. No specialist landing craft and no naval gun support.
The plan was that once ashore they would capture a large port intact to bring in ships with artillery and armour.

In the 70s the remaining commanders from the German and British forces that would have been involved in Sealion took part in a wargame at Sandhurst.
They gamed the landings and the aftermath.
To help the Germans the RN wasn't allowed to interfere for 24 hours after the first landing on the beach and the Luftwaffe were given air superiority.

All the south coast and channel ports were blocked and immobilised within hours of the fist landing.
German troops made some progress inland from the beaches but without armour and artillery or any naval gunfire support they made little headway towards their objective ports.
RN ships arrived in among the barges and their tugs just as they were returning to their embarkation ports to collect supplies and second wave forces and they were obliterated.
After a few days of fighting the surviving Germans surrendered.

In reality the RN would have been in among the invasion barges as soon as they left port and tried to form up.
RN Destroyer sweeps regularly patrolled right up th the French coast right down the Channel and even in to some of the ports to shoot things up a bit.
Hundreds of barges assembling at sea and wallowing behind their tugs at 3 or 4 knots would have been destroyed before they even got away from the coast.
Indeed, and given the times, the RN would have had opportunity for night attacks without any concerns of air cover. Overlord required air and naval supremacy - not just superiority. Even then the 1944 storms caused logistical difficulties for the Allies.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 11:03 AM   #535
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,623
The short answer is that militarily the Germans could not take out Britain.

Taking Britain out of the fight because it did not wish to continue the war is a different matter. I will note that in wars against major continental powers the British response to land defeats has been to withdraw to the home islands, boost the RN, crippling the seaborne trade of the continent, and then dealing with the overstretched land forces of the continental power. Seems to work.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 11:15 AM   #536
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,732
Henri also seems to assume that the Luftwaffe will be hammering London into rubble the day war breaks out. Given what actually happened in WWII the major air battles over the Channel and UK (assuming the Germans can repeat their gamble of 1940 with similar results for France) are going to be in summer 1939, by which time the RAF will have had the opportunity to substantially upgrade fighter command and get some version of Chain Home running.

If France doesn't fall of course the Germans face a miserable war of attrition and with no flow of materiel from the USSR and the nagging threat of the rebuilding Soviet army at their rear I don't see them holding for anything like the six years they managed historically.

And the other thing that hasn't been mentioned is the Holocaust, how many millions might be spared if the Germans don't occupy Poland, the Ukraine, and Western Europe?
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 11:35 AM   #537
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,647
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
To my mind a lot would have depended on the air war in 1938, and the RAF had practically no Spitfires in 1938. It must be remembered that London was heavily bombed by the Germans even in the First World War which is now largely forgotten. If the RAF had been made non operational in 1938 by the Germans a cross-channel invasion would not have been a really opposed landing. general Alan Brooke was worried about a German parachute landing in the London parks and other places in September 1940 and he was honestly expecting a German invasion at any moment then, though the British public and House of Commons were not told that information at the time:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/w...f-Britain.html
In May 1941 the Germans had great difficulties in Crete and their one and only Parachute division suffered unacceptable losses in that operation, successful though it finally was. Now tell me how the Germans were to knock the UK out of the war by landing parachutists in London parks.

Last edited by Craig B; 14th February 2018 at 11:43 AM.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 11:45 AM   #538
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 21,140
Look at their contribution to the Ardennes offensive.
landed in the wrong place, hid in a wood then surrendered.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 11:53 AM   #539
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 44,159
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
Market garden would like to have a word with you. Or Dieppe.
Germany did not have anywhere near the "Sea life" capability to pull off an invasion in 1938, and had to depend on a number of very dubious improvisions in planning Sea Lion in 1940.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 11:55 AM   #540
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
To my mind a lot would have depended on the air war in 1938, and the RAF had practically no Spitfires in 1938. It must be remembered that London was heavily bombed by the Germans even in the First World War which is now largely forgotten. If the RAF had been made non operational in 1938 by the Germans a cross-channel invasion would not have been a really opposed landing. general Alan Brooke was worried about a German parachute landing in the London parks and other places in September 1940 and he was honestly expecting a German invasion at any moment then, though the British public and House of Commons were not told that information at the time:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/w...f-Britain.html
Look up the operation radius of the Bf109 and then tell me why Spitfires would be necessary, bearing in mind they would be flying from Germany.
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 11:57 AM   #541
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 44,159
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
The short answer is that militarily the Germans could not take out Britain.

Taking Britain out of the fight because it did not wish to continue the war is a different matter. I will note that in wars against major continental powers the British response to land defeats has been to withdraw to the home islands, boost the RN, crippling the seaborne trade of the continent, and then dealing with the overstretched land forces of the continental power. Seems to work.
Churchill said the only thing during the war the really scared him was the U Boats...If Germany had been able to do to British Sea Traffic what the US Navy's Submarine campaign in the Pacific did to Japan a negotiated peace might have looked good to many in Britian.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 12:00 PM   #542
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,623
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Churchill said the only thing during the war the really scared him was the U Boats...If Germany had been able to do to British Sea Traffic what the US Navy's Submarine campaign in the Pacific did to Japan a negotiated peace might have looked good to many in Britian.
Given the disparity in naval capacity between Britain and Germany - I'm not so certain that an earlier start would have benefited Germany.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 12:09 PM   #543
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,732
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
Given the disparity in naval capacity between Britain and Germany - I'm not so certain that an earlier start would have benefited Germany.
It really doesn't. Far fewer surface units for the British to fret about and a painfully small U-Boat force that isn't going to be threatening Britain's oceanic trade for quite awhile.
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 12:21 PM   #544
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,829
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Germany did not have anywhere near the "Sea life" capability to pull off an invasion in 1938, and had to depend on a number of very dubious improvisions in planning Sea Lion in 1940.
That was actually the point. Even with "Sea life" Allies had a lot to learn and Market garden show cased how well would mass parachute op go.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 12:27 PM   #545
Degeneve
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 868
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
HOW? How would German military cross that Channel? Where the hell would they even get resources?
I see only two possibilities:

Moses method: Hitler positions himself at the Cape Gris-Nez and splits the channel waters in two as Moses did with the waters of the Red See and the Wehrmacht can easily cross the Channel

Jesus method: Hitler makes the German infantry divisions walk (at goose step of course) on the Channel waters.

In both cases the British troops are so demoralized that they surrender even without fighting...

I have however the feeling that both possibilities had almost no chance to become real...
Degeneve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 12:32 PM   #546
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,723
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
Look up the operation radius of the Bf109 and then tell me why Spitfires would be necessary, bearing in mind they would be flying from Germany.
But you see Fall Gelb would've gone exactly the same in '38 even without the captured Czech tanks, and enough PzIII's and Iv's to outfit a single battalion
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 12:34 PM   #547
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted by Degeneve View Post
I see only two possibilities:

Moses method: Hitler positions himself at the Cape Gris-Nez and splits the channel waters in two as Moses did with the waters of the Red See and the Wehrmacht can easily cross the Channel

Jesus method: Hitler makes the German infantry divisions walk (at goose step of course) on the Channel waters.

In both cases the British troops are so demoralized that they surrender even without fighting...

I have however the feeling that both possibilities had almost no chance to become real...
Optional Jesus Method II - Turn the channel into wine, British and French drink themselves to death in 3 days flat
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 12:36 PM   #548
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,723
Originally Posted by Degeneve View Post
I see only two possibilities:

Moses method: Hitler positions himself at the Cape Gris-Nez and splits the channel waters in two as Moses did with the waters of the Red See and the Wehrmacht can easily cross the Channel

Jesus method: Hitler makes the German infantry divisions walk (at goose step of course) on the Channel waters.

In both cases the British troops are so demoralized that they surrender even without fighting...

I have however the feeling that both possibilities had almost no chance to become real...
Or, the Kriegsmarine consisting of 2 undergunned BB's, 3 mini battleships, 4 CL's and about 20 destroyers defeats a navy easily 10 times its size. ETA: oops, Scharnhorst was commissioned in Jan '39 so just one actually.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 14th February 2018 at 12:44 PM.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 12:47 PM   #549
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,732
Isn't also a rather damning indictment of Chamberlain's leadership if it were true that Britain had no choice except to capitulate at Munich or face all but instant defeat?
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 01:35 PM   #550
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Or, the Kriegsmarine consisting of 2 undergunned BB's, 3 mini battleships, 4 CL's and about 20 destroyers defeats a navy easily 10 times its size. ETA: oops, Scharnhorst was commissioned in Jan '39 so just one actually.
And as mentioned above the Gniensenhorsts couldn't actually shoot their guns until early '39 (bit of a drawback for a BB)
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 01:37 PM   #551
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
But you see Fall Gelb would've gone exactly the same in '38 even without the captured Czech tanks, and enough PzIII's and Iv's to outfit a single battalion
What Henri is proposing is that the UK capitulates within a week. So starting on Monday morning, we have to have Fall Gelb completed by say Thursday lunchtime, with the BoB and Sealowe successfully completed with enough time to get Sunday dinner in the oven.
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2018, 01:55 PM   #552
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,732
Originally Posted by Hubert Cumberdale View Post
What Henri is proposing is that the UK capitulates within a week. So starting on Monday morning, we have to have Fall Gelb completed by say Thursday lunchtime, with the BoB and Sealowe successfully completed with enough time to get Sunday dinner in the oven.
Cooked goose would seem an appropriate meal.
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2018, 06:54 AM   #553
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Britain would have ended up like Holland and Denmark and Norway and Belgium in 1938. You must be too strong to be attacked, which Chamberlain understood, but not Churchill.
And how did giving away Czechoslovakia help? Nazi Germany still tried to attack (Battle of Britain).

But please, explain to us how Germany could have vanquished Britain within a week as you claimed.

Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
The short answer is that militarily the Germans could not take out Britain.

Taking Britain out of the fight because it did not wish to continue the war is a different matter. I will note that in wars against major continental powers the British response to land defeats has been to withdraw to the home islands, boost the RN, crippling the seaborne trade of the continent, and then dealing with the overstretched land forces of the continental power. Seems to work.
This.

The last successful foreign invasion was in 1688, and that was with consent of Parliament. Napoleon assembled 400,000 troops around Boulogne-sur-Mer in 1804, couldn't solve the crossing problem either and thought the better of it (it helped that the Austrians got uppity).
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2018, 07:00 AM   #554
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
In the 70s the remaining commanders from the German and British forces that would have been involved in Sealion took part in a wargame at Sandhurst.
They gamed the landings and the aftermath.
To help the Germans the RN wasn't allowed to interfere for 24 hours after the first landing on the beach and the Luftwaffe were given air superiority.
This thread is really going in rounds, isn't it? To up your Sandhurst wargame report, here's from page 4 of the thread:

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
There's a story I've heard, possibly apocryphal, that Sandhurst war-gamed a German invasion in 1940 in which the forces available to Britain were Snoopy in his Sopwith Camel, Captain Pugwash and the Black Pig, and the Walmington-on-Sea platoon of the Home Guard, and the German invasion still failed.
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Hundreds of barges assembling at sea and wallowing behind their tugs at 3 or 4 knots would have been destroyed before they even got away from the coast.
I wonder if sending some good old-fashioned burners into the crowd of barges would also have been effective, like it was in 1588?
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2018, 07:03 AM   #555
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
In May 1941 the Germans had great difficulties in Crete and their one and only Parachute division suffered unacceptable losses in that operation, successful though it finally was. Now tell me how the Germans were to knock the UK out of the war by landing parachutists in London parks.
Easy peasy. Land a skilled orator in Hyde Park's Speakers' Corner and he'll convince the London populace that they should surrender.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2018, 07:06 AM   #556
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
That was actually the point. Even with "Sea life" Allies had a lot to learn and Market garden show cased how well would mass parachute op go.
Disregarding intelligence from the Dutch underground that there were significant German troops around Arnhem, and fitting out your troops with radios that only have a range of 5km while you drop them 20km off the intended target does not help. Still, John Frost held Arnhem bridge for four days.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2018, 09:15 AM   #557
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,723
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
This.

The last successful foreign invasion was in 1688, and that was with consent of Parliament. Napoleon assembled 400,000 troops around Boulogne-sur-Mer in 1804, couldn't solve the crossing problem either and thought the better of it (it helped that the Austrians got uppity).
Well France did get troops ashore in 1797... but I wouldn't call it a great success.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fishguard
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2018, 09:35 AM   #558
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,647
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Well France did get troops ashore in 1797... but I wouldn't call it a great success.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fishguard
They were awaited with enthusiasm in another part of the British Archipelago
O! The French are on the sea
Says the sean-bhean bhocht;
The French are on the sea,
Says the sean-bhean bhocht;
O! the French are in the bay,
They'll be here without delay,
And the Orange will decay,
Says the sean-bhean bhocht.
(Gaelic: "poor old woman" - a personification of Ireland) But when they did arrive, in 1798, they were speedily defeated.

Last edited by Craig B; 15th February 2018 at 09:45 AM. Reason: Add link.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2018, 09:49 AM   #559
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,110
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Says the sean-bhean bhocht.[/indent](Gaelic: "poor old woman" - a personification of Ireland)
That explains a lot about Sean Bean.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2018, 09:52 AM   #560
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,647
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
That explains a lot about Sean Bean.

Dave
Well, I must admit I've never thought of him as a personification of Ireland
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:55 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.