Reason for Germany's defeat

The Suez canal! you forgot it!
The Meditarean see has two exits.The allies could get ships from the red sea.A longer way,but a posibility.

QUOTE

The Suez canal! you forgot it!

Ooops! You're right, C-2, I had forgotten about that. Yes, that definitely changes things, although you have to admit that Gibraltar was of enormous strategic importance, and its loss would have put the UK military and supply fleet at a great disadvantage.

IIRC, most of the British supplies went around the cape and then up to the Red Sea. Gibraltar was more important I believe to covering the convoys in the Atlantic with aircraft. Of course, without Gibraltar, Operation Torch would have been limited to Morroco.

"In my opinion, the only scenario in wich Germany could won is them wining the Battle of Britain."

Well...I have a question related to the Battle of Britain:
Since Germany had 2944 pilots (and somewhat the same number of planes). The RAF only had about 804 squardrons (about 1600 planes..i'm not shure).
Why did Germany loose?

QUOTE

Well...I have a question related to the Battle of Britain: Since Germany had 2944 pilots (and somewhat the same number of planes). The RAF only had about 804 squardrons (about 1600 planes..i'm not shure). Why did Germany loose?

I think that the most used explanation is that suddenly the Germans changed the tactics and instead of carrying a war of attrition on the British fighter force (destroying the bases and effectives of the Fighter Command) they directed their resources towards bombing missions on civilian targets. Hence from predators they merely become prey.

QUOTE

I think that the most used explanation is that suddenly the Germans changed the tactics and instead of carrying a war of attrition on the British fighter force (destroying the bases and effectives of the Fighter Command) they directed their resources towards bombing missions on civilian targets. Hence from predators they merely become prey.

Why do you think Goering (or Hitler more likley) changed tactics? Very strange choice to turn operation Sea Lion from a oncomming succes into a disaster...

IIRC it had something to do with an RAF raid over Berlin and Hitler wanting to raze British cities in retaliation.

QUOTE

Why do you think Goering (or Hitler more likley) changed tactics? Very strange choice to turn operation Sea Lion from a oncomming succes into a disaster...

If I remember correctly, some British bombers dropped bombs on Berlin and this maddened the Germans. They were so blinded by the "need to teach the British a lesson" that they simply forgot their main objective in the Battle of Britain.

The way I see it, Germany could have one the war if they had done several things differently.

1. After the fall of France, Germany should have taken out Britain's air force for good with strategic bombing instead of attacking major cities. Even if the Germans don't invade the island, the British would probably wear away if they couldn't defend the skies or shipping. If the Germans would have been fully committed to the desert war as well by invading Malta and getting the Axis forces a few more divisions and more supplies, Britain's offensive capability would have been crushed.

2. Don't declare war on the USA! There was absoluty no reason for Germany to go to war America. Why invite strategic bombing, a European invasion, and endless resources to fight against you?

3. With the desert secure and Britain at bay, at least militarily, then the Germans might have pulled off a victory over Russia with a big push on Moscow. Who knows, maybe by the time Barbarossa would have started, like in 1942 if Britain was taken care of first, the smaller Axis nations might have been more prepared for it as well.

4. Trust the generals, let them do what they do best.

5. When the war started, Germany should have been on a total war economy as when they started it in 1943. The peak production in 1944 could have really been used earlier.

i think germany loose ww2 because it attacked too late in 41 the ussr,and hitler should of pursuade or force franco to involve int the war-> N africa in german hands->no invasion of italy & middle east oil.
thats what i think

A question: - too late? ok, i isee your point. But if Germany attacked in '42, Hitler had a new benefit - stronger allies. Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and ITALY, in '42 have greater power. Russia have T-34, but Germany gain time to develop new advanced/variants of weapons. MiG-3 in mass production is not a big problem for Me-109F or G (in first period of '42 begining east war). Il check some data from other category of weapon to have a good picture of this possibility. Or, better, a new topic?

Iama

-Not having any real allies, except Italy and Japan (but Japan was too far and fighting her own war).
-The alliance with Italy(Italy's army especialy)
-The poor equiped and untrained Romanian army
-War on tree fronts(one front being russia)
-The "we are the best, we are invincible, we are above other nations, we don't need allies we need slaves, hitler is a military genius - the greatest of all times- and of course he's never wrong, russians are stupid, england connot afford a war, let's declare war to america 'cause Japan did this" ideology

I doubt the RAF could be subdued even with maximum effort (which is what was done early). Bases could be withdrawn further north beyond Lufwaffe fighter range if need be.

The case for increasing north African commitment is interesting. However, supply was really the limiting factor. The German could hardly suppply the little they had. It's no use bringing in more vehicles which then have no fuel for action.

Another problem is that you modify one factor here and don't look at the results elsewhere. If the German had engaged say 10 division in north Africa with resulting increase in airpower and shipping capacity too, what about Barbaroosa ?
Delayed ? Or maybe the Russians would have attacked first in 42 ? Many "what ifs" ...

A state of war already existed for all practical purpose. FRD looked after it, did what was needed to piss off the Germans and got what he wanted. If the Germans had still not declared war, I think FDR would have done it himself

This post has been edited by Chandernagore on January 23, 2005 04:49 pm

Britain was outproducing Germany in Fighters, Bombers and Trainers by the beginning of 1940.

During the BoB (June 1940-April 1941), Britain produced 5,186 Fighters. Germany some 2,800 approx.

This would only happen if either the Italians invested in better docking facilities etc at there North African ports, or if they managed to persued Vichy France to allow them to use the larger ports in Tunisia.

Even at the height of the BoB, Britain was sending more Planes & Tanks to the N.African theatre than the Axis.

Germany could have easily supplied 10 or more divisions if Malta was invaded and controlled. That was the point will my number one reason.

As for the BoB, the RAF was on the verge of cracking when the Luftwaffe switched its tactics to city bombing. I don't have the numbers on hand, but I can get them to support this. With another half-year or so of concentrated German attacks on the RAF, in which the Luftwaffe would probably be expanding its production and training capabilities if it was fully committed, I doubt the RAF could have been able to withstand the onslaught. By this time the RAF would need pilots more than planes.