
09-23-2011, 01:43 PM
|
Approved Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 705
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt
Personal opinion on the matter:
Germany couldn't win, some people high up knew it and some were delusional and thought they would. (go back a few pages and read the account of that military exercise).
Overall, they made a half-hearted attempt to force the UK to sue for peace and "close" down one front before starting the second one in the East. It didn't work, they moved on.
The UK couldn't take the fight back to the Germans either for quite some time and when it tried to, it got appalling results (cross-channel raids all the way until the Dieppe fiasco).
Long story short, given the benefit of hindsight and looking at the big picture, things were on a stalemate ever since Dunkirk and until 1942 at least and even then, the turning of the tides occurred mostly in the East (Stalingrad, N.Africa and the Pacific front).
The UK can call this a German defeat because it didn't meet the stated aims (conquering Britain), the other side can call it an effort doomed from the start and they would both be correct.
My personal belief is that most of the sane people in the German high command were looking to force Britain out of the war to secure their flanks before Barbarrossa, the conquering talk was mostly intimidating bravado and propaganda. The British didn't know it at the time so they acted like it was true (better safe than sorry after all) and that's why this registers as a victory to them. The Germans were divided between those who believed their own tale and thus considered it a defeat, and those who viewed it as a side-show from the start and didn't. I think all three opinions are valid for people who were engaged in the battle in whatever capacity.
|
+1
One of the best summaries I have read about it in while..
|