Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As Brave New World points out, no one has professionally wargamed a successful German invasion of England under 1940 - 1941 conditions.
On this - I have played all the versions of Axis & Allies, various other hex based tabletops, and a bunch of the Grigsby games, most recently War in the East....and even with a ton of trial and error, your opponent making tons of blunders, etc....it is very rare to be both historically accurate and victorious as Germany during WW II. And if you do play Germany in any historically accurate wargame, make one mistake and you're cooked 2-3 turns later.
They had a tough row to hoe even if everything had gone perfectly for them and perfectly bad for everyone else. Add in the many ways in which things did not go so perfectly for them and definitely favored their opposition, like just their starting geography, material and personnel which were by no means perfect nor really ideal for the war/conquest Hitler envisioned...and yeah, they were done the instant they decided Poland and Czechoslavakia weren't enough.
Well when your entire strategy is to gain air superiority to suppress naval forces so you can launch an amphibious assault over 26 miles of sea in wooden boats and without any real armor support. You may want to rethink your strategy.
The great nation of the Soviet Union did the most to crush it's former ally who turned against them. That once ally is nazi Germany. The red army fought valiantly at battle of Moscow, stalingrad, siege of leningrad, kursk selow Heights, siege of Berlin and many more. Soviet union was a great state, very patriarchal, and now it's gone.
Well when your entire strategy is to gain air superiority to suppress naval forces so you can launch an amphibious assault over 26 miles of sea in wooden boats and without any real armor support. You may want to rethink your strategy.
Just sayin...
At least one Wehrmacht general (forgot the name) claimed it was just a large-scale river crossing. Which goes to prove that some people get promoted to their level of incompetence.
Well, the UK did stand alone at first against Germany. If it wasn't for them Germany might have had a better chance against Russia, no? Russia sure paid heavily with lives though fighting the Germans (with supply help from the US).
At least one Wehrmacht general (forgot the name) claimed it was just a large-scale river crossing. Which goes to prove that some people get promoted to their level of incompetence.
I think it was "possible" but highly unlikely and hardly worth it. The German death toll would have been enormous.
The Germans just wanted the UK out of the way. Their plans lay to the East.
Germany would have had to spend years building up an invasion force that could take the UK. An opposed landing across the Channel took quite a bit of doing in 1944, and that was without the equivalent of the Royal Navy ready to spoil everyone's day.
Anyway, it's (almost) pointless to speculate about Hitler not moving East - his entire political philosophy was based on expanding Germany eastwards, so that the master race could rule over the Slavs.
I am not sure Hitler's involvement in that quixotic plot is an established fact.
Americans think the US came into Europe on a white horse and defeated the Nazis. In reality, the Soviet Union did most of the work.
The big US victory was in the Pacific.
Spacifically, yeah.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.