Quote:
Originally Posted by NZtyphoon
Amazing how 70 years after the event there are still people who treat the subject as a propaganda war. Did the Luftwaffe succeed in its set goals of crippling the RAF, which was one of the conditions required before an invasion could even be contemplated? Did the Luftwaffe achieve air-superiority over the seas around SE England, preventing the RN from operating against any potential invasion fleet (not forgetting the Kriegsmarine was still recovering from the Norwegian invasion, with most of its cruisers and destroyers sunk or crippled and no real battleships and no aircraft carriers to counter the British battle fleet)? Did the Kriegsmarine or Wehrmacht have the equipment to actually transport enough troops to pull off a successful invasion? Did Germany succeed in invading Britain?
The historical-strategic point is that the Luftwaffe did not succeed in any of its set goals, it's highly debatable whether enough or any troops could have been landed, even had the Luftwaffe been able to achieve even local air superiority, and last time I looked Britain hadn't been invaded. Forget all this nonsense about "national pride and similar propaganda" that's just the usual cop-out of someone trying to use spin to gloss over a German defeat. I ain't even British.
|
without going into the speculation over a possible invasion and how it should/could have been conducted,
Just like the Germans didn't consider the interruption of aerial operations a loss, but more of a "we'll get back to you later", the course of the war and the change of tactics meant that the aerial clashes over the Channel were never to be repeated, but considering it a defeat for the Luftwaffe is ludicrous to say the least, I think that the conclusions drawn over the Battle of Britain are often controversial, because there's a somewhat skewed perception of the events.
I suppose it's down to semantics, since it's also the use of words like "battle" and "victory" that doesn't apply in an uniform and effective way to those events.
The whole name "Battle of Britain" referred to the aerial operations over the Channel was an invention of the British propaganda machine, the Luftwaffe didn't perceive that as a battle per se, but the first part of Operation Sea Lion, so the interruption of the operation because of other commitments wasn't losing a battle.
In a way it's kinda surprising one has to explain such things, but I suppose the job made by propaganda was so good that "The Battle of Britain" earned its place in the history of UK, rightly so, but with a somewhat distorted significance.