The Battle of Britain Was The First Defeat For The German Luftwaffe.

[NedLynch]

Wow, what a thread, such passion and personal feelings, I can't condone the wording in some posts, but I can understand it.

The thread went far off topic from the original "how did they cope with it".

Let's see if I can input my 2cents for what it's worth.

Germany did not start WW1, due to the events in Sarajevo and subsequent actions of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the at the time existing treaties Germany was drawn into the war, the powder keg that Europe was at the time simply exploded.
Post war humiliation of Germany cetainly didn't help crate a stable political landscape. (Never completely humiliate an enemy after defeating him, since he may later become your ally, Sun Tzu, The Art of War, freely quoted).

The Luftwafffe had an internally torn and inept leadership that failed to see pretty much everything, especially in terms of tactics and strategy.

The Luftwaffe was not designed to deal with the task at hand, it was very much a branch of the armed forces that was at it's best fighting in concert with ground forces.

Luftwaffe pilots were at a distinct phsicological disadvantage, you constantly have to watch your fuel guage over England, it may seem minor but it's certainly not (Kanal Krankheit).

The Luftwaffe leadership completely underestimated the strength of the RAF and Britain's production rate for new airplanes.

Radar in concert with the right strategy of not going for an all out battle with the Luftwaffe was a huge advantage for Britain.

BUT the most understated and yet maybe the most important thing in the battle was the organisation of fighter command, and it's network of civilian spotters all throughout England. This network of spotters, all equiped with a telehone line (state of the art technology at the time), no matter where, was the world's first intranet and was virtually indestructible. The MarkI Eyeball was the true enabler for fighter command and the RAF to fight so effectively and successfully.

Common therories suggest that the RAF was close to being on it's knees when the attacks were shifted from airfields and military installations to bombing cities, new research suggests that the RAF in fact never came close to being on it's knees (History Channel, Battlefield Detectives, Battle of Britain), huge losses, yes, RAF veteran pilots didn't even bother to learn the names of the replacement pilots when they just arrived, but never close to defeat.

While this list is certainly not complete, in conclusion the BoB was a decisive victory for Britain, I am not sure which german officer said it (going to have to research), but when asked when he thought Germany had lost WW2, he answered "with the Battle of Britain" and I completely agree.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by NedLynch

, in conclusion the BoB was a decisive victory for Britain, I am not sure which german officer said it (going to have to research), but when asked when he thought Germany had lost WW2, he answered "with the Battle of Britain" and I completely agree.

Sometimes I just love Americans. Cheers Ned.

Wasn't it Paulus at Stalingrad?

[NedLynch]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Sometimes I just love Americans. Cheers Ned.

Wasn't it Paulus at Stalingrad?

You know, it seriously does hurt to see these guys fighting with each other here. You know where the expression "anglo-saxon" comes from and why England is named England?

As for the battle being a decisive victory for Britain, even just looking at the numbers confirms it, google it and find the losses for each side, but beyond that, the Luftwaffe did not acomplish it's set goal (not due to it's pilots), while the RAF did.

And for anyone who underestimates the fighting ability of british soldiers all I have to say, from everything I know, I would never ever want to meet british soldiers in combat. I've met british troops,combat troops, in peace, as an ally, and they are dead serious professionals who know exactely what they are doing.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by NedLynch

You know where the expression "anglo-saxon" comes from and why England is named England?

I certainly do. In fact when my sister asked me why I studied German at school rather than French, I said it was because I identified more readily with my Anglo-Saxon genes than my Norman ones.

It's also one of the reasons Hitler didn't want to go to war against Britain.

No offence to any of our French members intended, before anyone severs my jugular!

[NedLynch]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

I certainly do. In fact when my sister asked me why I studied German at school rather than French, I said it was because I identified more readily with my Anglo-Saxon genes than my Norman ones.

It's also one of the reasons Hitler didn't want to go to war against Britain.

No offence to any of our French members intended, before anyone severs my jugular!

Well, with "you" I was more aiming at kongootto and maybe bongodriver as well, but you are right of course Dutch.

Those guys from the northern part of Germany even fought under Wellington in the Peninsular Campaign and at Waterloo.
And, I will have to confirm this, if I am not mistaken, the House of Windsor are still originally Hanovarians.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by NedLynch

Well, with "you" I was more aiming at kongootto and maybe bongodriver as well, but you are right of course Dutch.

Those guys from the northern part of Germany even fought under Wellington in the Peninsular Campaign and at Waterloo.
And, I will have to confirm this, if I am not mistaken, the House of Windsor are still originally Hanovarians.

It's OK I know what Anglo Saxon is all about too, but it's a little lost on me because I am 1/4 russian, 1/4 english and the rest is German, Irish and Dutch.

[NedLynch]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

It's OK I know what Anglo Saxon is all about too, but it's a little lost on me because I am 1/4 russian, 1/4 english and the rest is German, Irish and Dutch.

My point is there once was a bond and then came the slaughter of WW1 and WW2.

As a british veteran of D-Day in an interview said (again a little freely quoted): War is nothing but death and distruction and desease. There is no glory in war, in war everybody looses.
This veteran was part of airborne troops that took and held a vital bridge the night before the invasion.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by NedLynch

Wow, what a thread, such passion and personal feelings, I can't condone the wording in some posts, but I can understand it.

The thread went far off topic from the original "how did they cope with it".

Let's see if I can input my 2cents for what it's worth.

Germany did not start WW1, due to the events in Sarajevo and subsequent actions of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the at the time existing treaties Germany was drawn into the war, the powder keg that Europe was at the time simply exploded.

I'm sorry but that's wrong. It's now a fact that Germany can be considered the main culript of WW1. The Sarajevo killing was only a short term cause, look up for the Schliffen Plan, it was discovered only after the war by some brave German historians and it was the smoking gun, the evidence that the Germans had in mind a European continent invasion and they pushed themselves as much as thinking of a new order for African countries as well.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I'm sorry but that's wrong. It's now a fact that Germany can be considered the main culript of WW1. The Sarajevo killing was only a short term cause, look up for the Schliffen Plan, it was discovered only after the war by some brave German historians and it was the smoking gun, the evidence that the Germans had in mind a European continent invasion and they pushed themselves as much as thinking of a new order for African countries as well.

True to a point, but not giving the whole picture. The first country to start mobilisation was Russia. Everything else went on automatic from that point on.

http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/willynicky.htm

These letters between the Tsar and the Kaiser should be of particlular interest in this regard.

[NedLynch]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I'm sorry but that's wrong. It's now a fact that Germany can be considered the main culript of WW1. The Sarajevo killing was only a short term cause, look up for the Schliffen Plan, it was discovered only after the war by some brave German historians and it was the smoking gun, the evidence that the Germans had in mind a European continent invasion and they pushed themselves as much as thinking of a new order for African countries as well.

The Schlieffen Plan was the German General Staff's early 20th century overall strategic plan for victory in a possible future war where it might find itself fighting on two fronts: France to the west and Russia to the east. The First World War later became such a war with both a Western Front and an Eastern Front. The plan took advantage of expected differences in the three countries' speed in preparing for war. In short, it was the German plan to avoid a two-front war by concentrating their troops in the west, quickly defeating the French and then, if necessary, rushing those troops by rail to the east to face the Russians before they had time to mobilize fully. The Schlieffen Plan was created by Count Alfred von Schlieffen and modified by Helmuth von Moltke the Younger after Schlieffen's retirement. It was Moltke who actually put the plan into action, despite initial reservations about it.[citation needed] In modified form, it was executed to near victory in the first month of World War I; however, the modifications to the original plan, a French counterattack on the outskirts of Paris (the Battle of the Marne), and surprisingly speedy Russian offensives, ended the German offensive and resulted in years of trench warfare. The plan has been the subject of intense debate among historians and military scholars ever since. Schlieffen's last words were "remember to keep the right flank strong".


Taken from wikipedea, not the all knowing source many claim it to be, but it gives you a good idea.