Germany did not lose the Battle of Britain

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by planespotter

To American airmen, the conflict was an exciting opportunity to fly and fight in aircraft that were the apogee of engineering at the time. The Spitfire was as iconic in the USA as it was in the UK and many pilots would give an arm and a leg (and some, their lives) for the chance to fly it. US pilots who could not qualify for the USAF training program because of its then limited intake, were welcomed with open cockpits in the RAF.

I really doubt that. According to Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Bri...s_contribution ) only 7 US pilots servered in the RAF during the BoB, and they were "incognito" because US citizens were prohibited due to US Neutrality Acts.

[csThor]

The BoB was really irrelevant to the US in general. The US society considered the war a "European Problem" and only after Pearl Harbor and Hitler's declaration of war it became "their" problem, too.

[planespotter]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Banks

I really doubt that. According to Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Bri...s_contribution ) only 7 US pilots servered in the RAF during the BoB, and they were "incognito" because US citizens were prohibited due to US Neutrality Acts.

Exactly my point, sorry if it was badly made. During the actual Battle, there were very few US pilots involved, but because of the success of the Battle from a US PR point of view, you will find that before Pearl Harbour more than 6,000 US pilots had applied to join the RAF/RCAF to fight in Europe, indicating the the US citizen did indeed see it as 'their problem' long before the US was attacked by Japan.

The first 'Eagle Squadron' was formed in Sept 1940. US neutrality did not pertain, because they joined as private citizens.

Three 'Eagle Squadrons' were formed and became the famed 4th Fighter Group of the USAF 8th airforce. Without the perception of victory in the Battle of Britain, there might still only have been seven US pilots in Britain at that point!

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by TUSA/TX-Gunslinger

Let me start with "I don't believe that Germany won the Battle of Britain", for those requiring a simple answer. I wonder how many of the "revisionist screamers" actually read Lt Col Lund's article which was referenced in the linked article. For those who missed the link, or did not read it, here it is:

http://funsite.unc.edu/hyperwar/ETO/BOB/BoB-German/

Remember that this is a USAF Joint Doctrine Air Campaign Course, written by a United States Air Force Officer.

I read the article.

That linked article has a clear conclusion:

Germany lost the Battle of Britain.

How the site which has the link on it could come to the conclusion that Germany didn't lose the BoB based on the linked article is a real question...

Originally Posted by TUSA/TX-Gunslinger

The assumption presented by some seems to be that since there was a plan for Seelowe, the Germany was 100% committed to it. This is only true with respect to the Luftwaffe.

Then why did Hitler move 330,000 troops to the French coast, move barges which were crucial to German industry away from the Rhine and other rivers to the French coast, convert 130 + tanks to amphibious use, move large parts of his fleet, etc. etc. Seelowe was much more than a 'plan'. It was an operational order.

Originally Posted by TUSA/TX-Gunslinger

After allowing the BEF to escape at Dunkirk, Hitler fully expected to work out a "deal" with Britain.

Amazing... another myth rears its whimpering pathetic head...

Hitler did not 'allow' anyone escape at Dunkirk, he did his best to capture all the forces which were trapped there. Following normal operational procedure for the German Army, once the pocket had been formed, the Panzers were moved onwards to position themselves for the next breakthrough (which ended up being on either side of Paris) Panzers did not reduce pockets, they left the mopping up to Infantry. The entirety of the Army Gruppe B which had come through the Netherlands, plus most of the Infantry from Army Gruppe A did what was expected, and started to reduce the pocket. The Germans never expected the British could evacuate the BEF, let alone 100,000 Frenchmen. They thought they had them in the bag. Operationally, the Germans were more concerned about a counterattack from the south to relieve the pocket, than they were about an evacuation. That is another reason for the repositioning of the Panzers southwards. The Luftwaffe, which up to this point had been completely successful in all its tasks, assured Hitler that the Royal Navy would be bombed out of existence if they showed themselves on the French side of the channel. Too bad that Dowding committed enough Spitfires and Hurricanes to make it impossible for the Luftwaffe to stop the RN. And that the British and French within the pocket, fought very hard and skillfully, because now, the Germans were not behind them, or outflanking them, but were forced to go headon against desperate men.

Originally Posted by TUSA/TX-Gunslinger

For example, the argument that the British success in the Air Defense of the home Island started a chain reaction that forced Hitler to invade Yugoslavia is absurd. The poster of that silly conclusion needs to examine the Balkans campaign in it's entirety.

I have examined the Balkan campaign in great detail. I think perhaps you should do the same.

Like for example, doing some reading on the Yugoslavian coup, which was sponsored by the British, and which led to the Nazi sympathetic government being overthrown, and then to Hitler invading. The regent Prince Paul, who was a client of the Nazis, signed the Tripartite pact on March 25th. Two days later he was overthrown in a coup led by the 18 year old British sponsored King Peter and Yugoslavia's agreement was voided. Hitler responded by postponing Operation Barbarossa and started the bombing of Belgrade on April 6th, with the invasion following shortly thereafter. Please explain how such a coup could have happened in the Spring of 1941, if the British had lost the BoB and were no longer in at war with Germany????

[Snuff_Pidgeon]

Quote:
Originally Posted by biggles109
Hitler had no intention to invade Germany. the amphibious tanks were designed for river crossings in the east, not sea landings