Germany did not lose the Battle of Britain

[Jughead]

"there is evidence that it barely registered in German consciousness in 1940 and is still of only minor significance today."

I would have to think that they reconsidered that on June 6th, 1944.

[Feuerfalke]

Just as much as Dunkirk is described in many British documents as a great military rescue operation against an overwhelming force. I saw very few British documents, that took note Hitler stopped his troops from crushing the British at the beach, hoping Britain would note this as a friendly act and strengthen the chances for a peace later on.

[Chivas]

The germans definitely lost the Battle of Britain. The purpuse of the battle was to clear the RAF from the sky's and land forces on British soil. Neither was accomplished. Thats a loss. Losers generally don't write alot of articles extrolling the virtues of their loss.

[Avimimus]

I actually think it was a major turning point in the war.

The simple fact is that the German airforce suffered heavily during the whole of 1939 and 1940 with almost even attrition rates against inferior opponents. But, if Germany had managed to get England to make peace in '39 and had avoided bombing cities then it could have been a victory. It could even have one them the war.

But the failure of fascist sypathisers to consolidate power in the parliament, the failure to demoralise or destroy the RAF and the bombing of civilian targets prevented this. It was the greatest political (not necessarily military) defeat imaginable.

With England still in the war and the Commonwealth behind her and with the pro-fascist element relatively restricted in what they could do made German defeat inevitable (even if the United States stayed isolationist - which became less likely each day the U.K. held out).

After this point only a really major alteration to history like a fascist coupe in an allied country, a German attack on the Soviet Union in 1938-1939 (which the allies would have been sympathetic to), a giant U-boat fleet or a much stronger German air defense could have altered events.

Eventually, even if it took an extra year, the Great Patriotic War would end in Berlin.

[csThor]

Some quick comments:

brando - Even though Douhet was a diffuse "ideal" they sought to reach each and every higher Luftwaffe officer, except that fat fool Göring, was well aware that Germany didn't have the assets to wage a war Douhet had envisioned. It didn't have the aircraft and not the ammunition needed to pulverize a whole country from the air. One reason for the obsession for the Stuka idea was the problem of a lack of explosives and ammunition factories (most of which had been torn down after 1918 on behalf of the Entente). The Stuka could deliver a relatively small payload with a much greater precision than any level bomber could until the appearance of much more sophisticated bombsights such as Lotfe 7 or Norden.

Avimimus - I think you're overestimating the potential of the Empire without being backed by the US industry. I mean Great Britain bancrupted itself just to pay for the lend&lease material and it still took the massive effort of the Red Army in the East as well as the appearance of US forces to tip the balance in the Allies's favor in the west (before it had been pretty much a draw after 1940). Make no mistake - british and commonwealth forces bravely held the line until the war potential of the US industry had been brought up to speed and until the US armed forces entered the battle, but it still took this massive influx of men and material to tip the tide of battle. The russians could and would have done it on their own (for various reasons), but I don't see Britain walking all over Germany on its own. For that task its sources of power were just too far away and its supply lines being much too exposed to enemy interferance.

[Avimimus]

CSThor, I agree completely.

The economic strain of the war was devastating to the United Kingdom and most Commonwealth countries also racked up decades worth of debt. In comparison the United States barely felt the strain of the war (economically that is) and were certainly could allies to have.

My assumption is simply that if England made peace in 1939, cross-Atlantic trade might well resume with the continent. This would be a disaster. If England did not make peace it would be much harder politically for an Anglo nation to conduct large scale trade with Axis Europe.

Without the Eastern Front I have trouble imagining any of the western allies, let alone the Commonwealth by itself, "walking over Germany" (prior to Trinity/the atomic bomb anyway). In all of the scenarios I assumed that the war on the eastern front would start and would eventually end with a Soviet victory (barring Allied nations joining or supplying the German army).

[revi]

Also amongst the German population was a strong 'denial' that there was such atrocities occurring at Aushwitz/Birkenau. Even today there are some diehards arguing this.

[nearmiss]

Hitler had a bigger problem.

Invading Russia

When German quit invading Britain, regardless of the reason it was a victory for Britain.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

Amazing what revisionist nonsense there is out there.

Fact: Hitler issued a directive that plans be drawn up to invade and force the surrender of Britain. OPERATION SEELOWE As part of this plan, huge land forces were assembled on the English channel, complete with invasion barges, naval forces, etc. The invasion plans involved two German Army Groups, and hundreds of thousands of troops.



Fact: Hitler ordered Goring, the leader of the Luftwaffe, to lay the groundwork for a successful invasion by gaining air superiority over the English Channel and southern England. The means to this end was the defeat of the RAF.

Fact: After approximately 2 months of continuous aerial combat on a massive scale, greater than ever seen before in the history of the world, and after failing to gain air superiority, and suffering nearly twice as many losses in aircraft as the RAF, Hitler ordered OPERATION SEELOWE to be posponed indefinitely.

Fact: Because Britain did not fall, and the Germans were unable to invade, they were forced to maintain large forces on the English Channel during 1941, as well as being forced to commit troops in Yugoslavia, Greece, and in North Africa to counter British moves in those areas. The fact they were forced to waste time conquering Yugoslavia and Greece, and therefore forced to start their invasion of the Soviet Union one month late, has been pointed to as a major reason for the failure of Nazi Germany to defeat Russia in 1941, and hence a major reason why they ultimately lost the war. They ran out of good campaigning weather, and were fatally slowed by mud, then caught in the Russian winter. And of course, beyond their failure to defeat the Soviets, they then had a resurgent Britain, with the addition of the U.S., who were then able to invade at Normandy from the British island base, (impossible to invade from mainland USA) as well as devastating German industry with Allied bombers based in Britain, as well as convoys carrying lendlease to the Soviets originating in Britain. Without the victory of the RAF in the Battle of Britain, thus allowing the island of Britain to remain free, none of this was possible.

[virre89]

Well get over it more or less they lost it,
Losing air superiority they wouldn't find it very smart going in with ground forces since they'd be pretty much raped before they could settle inland and get camps n stuff up.