Hitler did not initially plan war wtih Britain... No, but he made his plans as he went along, so at a time he planned to invade Britain, a bit later he didn't want to any longer. Nothing like having clear objectives.
Simple answer yes. He did not wish to occupy Britain though. He was going to set up Edward 'nazi' VIII back on the throne, set up a government and leave. We would still have probably had his 'secret police' working for him, but we would not be speaking German now though Hitler always wondered why we would not come over as we were generic allies. He thought our hate of anything commie would override his 'final solution' - if he had not touched the jews then the history of the world would be completely different. But as it was the jews (Banks etc) who raped Germany after WW1 and took all its money etc, you can see why he hated them. edit: according to Hitler!!
But as it was the jews (Banks etc) who raped Germany after WW1 and took all its money etc, you can see why he hated them. RD, would you care to explain/clarify that comment? If other members could refrain from chipping in until RD has replied that would be much appreciated. ~A
No problem, this was how Hitler described the jews. They stripped Gemrany of everything they owned, according to Hitler, and he blamed the 'jewish' banks, eg: Rothchilds. They funded the war, and took their cut at the end of it. edit: that was his 'excuse' all along according to modern history books and mein kampf as I recall. sorry if it wasn't made clear. Under these odds, there is no way Britian would have 'joined forces'. As an addition: I have just had a thought: if Hitler had not invaded Poland like he did, so cowardly, but waged war against Russia instead (geographically speaking) wuold there have been a WW2 at all?
I'd hoped that was what you meant: 'from Hitler's perspective it was the Jews...' etc. Nothing more than a slight slip in clarity then. Carry on chaps. ~A
How firmly set was he to invade ? At what stage did he intend to go "East" , in the summer of 40 or when all turned sour ( in his view) with Stalin ? The Navy always said it was impossible beyond their resources , the Army wanted to invade but wanted the Luftwaffe and navy to assure them that "they would get them there". Whilst Crete was on paper a success - it came at a price and was very , very close for a period of time - a few mistakes tipped the balance and allowed the foothold to be gained. Allied fighter cover over Crete was almost non existent - this would never have been the case in the event of Sealion being launched. German bombers , Stukas especially would have been gutted and the Royal Navy would have gone all out to destroy the seaborne elements. Getting there might have been possible but sustaining the pressure might have presented problem - with the Royal navy sinking supply barges and a Luftwaffe transport situation going from bad to worse - they didn't have enough transport aircraft and losses would have been heavy. Some elements would have landed but in what state of order and supply ? Echos of Arnhem , Stalingrad and Crete if the RN met the Germans at sea it was going to be a massacre and they knew this. I think the B of B was fought as much for the chance of the correct circumstances being obtained as well as for political reasons - the chance of Britain being forced to accept terms as well as being seen to keep up an attack on GB.
I strongly suspect that he intended to renage on the Soviet German Pact when he gave up on his intentions to invade the UK, you do not amass such a large force in ports opposite us as a bluff anyway. The whole idea of the Battle of Britain was to remove the air force as a threat to the invasion.
RD , I only think he would have come in those circumstances but in any case having reached the Channel he would have had to attack GB , air and sea were the only options. He wanted GB to accept terms - so he could turn east and as the B of B dragged on I think his will to invade slowly went with it as he realised that in spite of promises made and expectations voiced the break through failed to appear.
The whole idea of the Battle of Britain was to remove the air force as a threat to the invasion. Didn't I just say that? goering promised Hitler a clear sky over the Channel, it didn't happen. The invasion forces would have been massacred.
Hitler did not initially plan war wtih Britain, Brian. War with the West in 1939 was not on his timetable. Problem was - this was a year later....AND with the ultra-sudden collapse of France and all European opposition Hitler was in a TOTALLY different position than in September 1939...with only a very few number of ways available left to prosecute the war against his enemies! The Sandhurst wargames were all supposition with 20/20 hindsight. I have played wargames which produced completely ridiculous outcomes....so Sandhurst officers with their comfy Gods eye view and knowledge of the opponents plans dont really count in my humble oppinion. I've been involved in strictly-umpired "Sandhurst"-style paper and map-based wargames - and they are ANYTHING but random! It's actually THE most frustrating experience imaginable with the way umpires strictly maintain period context and eliminate fantasy :mellow: I prefer a good tabletop or boardgame any day compared to a staff college-style umpired game! Also dont forget that the SS were bas**rds and there was no rule of war they would not happily break, Except they would ONLY be involved POST-invasion
IMHO, I think it would be opportune to list all "local" and "other" occurrences around the world in 1940 that may have assisted Hitlers' decision "not" to invade Britain. Singularly, they did not condemn his plans for invasion however collectively there were too many negatives even for him. 1. Has to be his inability to secure air supremacy over Britain and the Channel. 2. The ease that his barges etc were destroyed on the French Coast by the RAF. 3. The United States enacted the Selective Training and Service Act (STSA) of September 16, 1940 There must be some more! Who has number 4?
Ok, whatever about his intentions of invading Britain, how many Germans thought that France would collapse so quickly. Circumstances overtook the Germans in that they had a window of opportunity that even they didnt think would exist. Window of opportunity - was it really that big? They didnt look that far in advance. Everyone keeps talking about how unprepared Britain was and how open it was to attack but was it? Sapper was in Normandy - he can certainly testify how much effort it took to get an army supplied and prepared for a cross channel invasion. To get the invasion force across the channel they would need Air Supremacy, not superiority and they didnt get it. The Royal Navy would have certainly beaten whatever the Kriegsmarine could throw at it - and without air supremacy they wouldnt have the means to destroy the Royal Navy. The German Economy was on a peacetime footing folks! And whilst the Army was in no fit state in 1940, the Royal Air Force and Navy were more than ready to take up the mantle.
2. The ease that his barges etc were destroyed on the French Coast by the RAF. Ah, yes, the barges. The barges taken from the river waterways of Western Europe, completely unable to face any water over one foot undulation. Throwing these into the sea would make a fine feast for the fish! Hardly comparable to what the Arsenal for Democracy used to do, in terms of LCIs and LSTs... And anyway after a few months immobilised in the Low Countries and Northern France ports, subject to the attentions of Coastal Command, the economies were already creaking, so they just had to go back where they belonged Certainly not equipped for Überherr (Overlord in mock-German), they weren't.
4. The German Navy knew and made no secret that it could not get the Army ashore intact , it was very anti invasion. 5 As Gerard rightly says the Britain was unprepared but equally German had no experience of seaborne invasion she had prepared for a war confined to mainland Europe which she was only partly prepared to fight and now found herself having to make another seaborne assault. Crete has been mentioned ....but what about Norway - another close run affair which was a success the price of which was shouldered by the Kriegsmarine - had an invasion taken place they would quickly have been utterly destroyed and in common with Norway getting airbases would have to have been a priority and being able to fly in supplies to them would have been another. Hitler took a lesson from Crete , he might have been more open to Raeder's concerns than he was Goring's confidence and he must have been mindful of the failure at Dunkirk. Britain won that air battle and showed no sign of being defeated over their own skies.
In relation to Bomber Command barge-busting.... 6/(?) the ease that German camps/stockpiles were bombed by Bomber Command. There are several instances of major RAF successes against troop concentrations and stockpiled supplies marshalled by the Germans, including a large arsenal that went up at Dunkirk IIRC. 7/ the major economic penalty that Germany was sufering from having her riverine barges gathered on the coast of FRANCE! These moved a HUGE percentage of German raw materials on the Rhine, Main and others (and Danube, though these later weren't moved IIRC) and German industrial output was beginning to drop off measureably due to the absence of this vital transport. There were at least two strident demands for them to be returned urgently BEFORE Sealion was officially "postponed"...and of course thanks to the RAF there were hundreds that had to be replaced as it was!
Crete has been mentioned ....but what about Norway - another close run affair which was a success the price of which was shouldered by the Kriegsmarine - had an invasion taken place they would quickly have been utterly destroyed and in common with Norway getting airbases would have to have been a priority and being able to fly in supplies to them would have been another. Hitler took a lesson from Crete... Hitler DID take a major lesson from Norway...and Holland. That dropping FJ ahead of the main assault to take and hold some objective turned the rest of the plan into just getting to and relieving the FJ; airborne ops cost hundreds of vital transport Ju52s lost or damaged (180 in Norway alone) - while the spiralling-down of Richtofen's ability to sortie in the second week of Poland because of a lack of LW air transport showed him and the OKW how vital they were for OTHER roples, the ones they were intended for. It showed the FJ were terribly vulnerable to resupply problems. Hence the FJ initially being relegated to a minor role for Sealion... It took a LOT of lobbying by Student for opportunities to "prove" the FJ after that - and the Corinth bridges' "technical" success achieved that - a little. Crete was thought to be a particularly favourable set of circumstances...and thus conversely IT proved that the FJ hadn't cured it's major flaws. But they were still the same flaws as 1940...
8. The Med and Spain. While Hitlers meeting with Franco and the "Pulling Teeth" meeting in October confirmed "officially" Franco would not join the Axis, there were earlier meetings with his emissaries that pointed to Franco not being involved.
10. The rescue of 500,000+ allied troops from the beaches of Dunkirk and Le Havre etc. Whatever the state of the materiel availability after the losses at Dunkirk he would be well aware that they would all be there to welcome his invasion force with something to prove. We know now that unknown to many shipments of arms had arrived from The United States. While not sufficient for a prolonged confrontation, it would not have been. We also know now that troops were being specifically trained to protect landing fields in the south of England from German Paratroops so there would have been no surprises there.
This thread is not going to go away, so, although I have already stated my case for answering YES, I'd like another bite of the cherry. Had the original thread title been "Would the German High Command ex of Hitler really have invaded Britain" then I might have had to answer with a qualified NO. England in those days, by virtue of the fact that it was surrounded by water and had it's implied coastal defences, might have very well have been considered by the German high command a "country too far". But we are talking of a Third Reich that was dominated by the presence of a rabid megalomanic and I have no doubts at all that he would have loved to have occupied these Islands and to have imposed his obnoxious creed on its inhabitants whatever the cost to the German people. That Hitler never invaded was one of the miracles of modern times. Ron
