Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Possible History" channel.

Attempting Sealion with few operational warships, and no landing craft, would have been something of a challenge. THe bulk of the Royal Navy was not defending convoys at that point. After Dunkirk most destroyers and cruisers had been allocated to bases near to the Channel.
1
@tom79013 It really doesn't matter how many troops you have, if your enemy controls the sea and the sky above it.
1
@Outlier999 'There were several strategies he could have used to get into a better position for peace negotiations.' Such as?
1
Rommels' attempted coup?
1
Just out of interest, if Germany lacked the naval resources to cross the English Channel, exactly how would German forces get to Ireland?
1
How could they be anything else, given that Operation Sealion was never attempted?
1
They did. Unescorted bomber forces from Norway suffered appalling casualties.
1
@cristianosousa2220 How, and why?
1
@cristianosousa2220 Well then. No, they didn't.
1
I agree, they weren't. However, they were largely ignorant of the problems involved in carrying out assault landings. Especally when your sidehas a tiny navy, and no landing craft, whilst the British were able to protect their beaches by deploying the largest navy on earth.
1
Initially, German troops had only been sent to North Africa to shore up the Italian position followinh the disaster of Operation Compass. Actually getting large forces there without control of the sea was almost impossible, and maintaining those which were there was difficult.
1
Then my cousin Eric might well have been Holy Roman Emperor.
1
Unless an invasion was actually attempted, there would be no reason for the Royal Navy to operate in the Channel. During the period of the invasion threat, the RN operated regular patrols from Plymouth and the Nore, and regularly shelled, or at least investigated, the invasion ports.
1
'Panzer force?' What panzer force. The planned landing did not involve more than a tiny number of tanks, which, it appears, were expected to drop off barges near the targetted beaches and drive ashore along the sea bed. In fact, the C-in-C at the Nore, Admiral Drax, had agreed with the Air Ministry that Bomber Command would not attempt the invasion force at sea, but would leave the field clear for the RN's cruisers, destroyers, and support warships.
1
@TreverF-ul7yo How would Germany send 'some troops' to Ireland, when the Germans never found a means of getting them to Britain. Didn't your extensive studies of WW2 alert you to the existence of the Royal Navy? Do you know how long it takes to train conscripts? Usually around six months. Do you know where the Republic acquired what weapons it had from? Britain, of course. The Irish air force consisted of four Gloster Gladiator biplane fighters, nine Avro Ansons, three Supermarine Walruses, and six Westland Lysanders, the army of 19,000 men, and the navy of 2 Motor Torpedo Boats, also from Great Britain.
1
@TreverF-ul7yo What has that to do with Operation Sealion? In 1940 Stalin had a non-aggression pact with hitler, and the Soviet Union was already supplying Germany with large quantities of raw materials, especially oil.
1
The difference perhaps being that in Britain few civilians would have helped the invaders by giving them accurate directions, whilst French civilians would have helped the Americans, British, & Canadians?
1
Given the condition of Spain after the Civil War, what help do you think she might have been? Moreover, Spain at the time was reliant on US aid.
1
@Amfx1 I have never understood why people post comments on such subjects when they clearly have nothing relevant to say. Perhaps you would care, or at least try, to explain your rationale?
1
No American destroyer sank any U-Boat in either 1940 or 1941.
1
@sebping7205 I hadn't realised that you were a neo. Had you mentioned it, I would have ignored you. By the way, you haven't discussed my original comment, which was :- 'If 'International Law' is the topic under discussion, then some might argue that invading Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, & Belgium, all without declarations of war, was hardly in accordance with it?
1
It simply proves that they had been preparing for war, whilst most countries hoped to maintain peace. They had a three year start, but look what happened thereafter.,
1
@TonyChan-eh3nz Certainly, the French would lose in a conventional naval conflict, but the fear was that the French might use their cruisers and destroyers (of which in both types they were quite well equipped) to support an attempted crossing of the Channel.
1
@TonyChan-eh3nz What? You consider the La Galissonnieres and the Duguay-Trouins to have been poor ships? They were comparable to any RN light cruiser of the period prior to the Southamptons. Moreover, we are not talking of another Jutland, but the possible use of French warships to screen an invasion attempt, which would be challenged in the first instance not by the RN heavies of the Home Fleet, but by the light cruisers and destroyers based at Plymouth, Portsmouth, & the Nore.
1
@TonyChan-eh3nz Of which there were only two. Certainly they did not compare with the British Counties, but, as they were in Alexandria at the time, their relevance is questionable, to say the least.
1
@websystema 'Germans didn't need fleet to invade England, they just needed big amount of boats capable to cross La-Manche.' Just how do these boats manage to evade the Royal Navy's anti-invasion forces?
1
@websystema Air superiority did become superior, but not as early as 1940, and to a far lesser extent in the west than in the wider expanses of the Pacific. Air superiority did not, for example, prevent the successful evacuation of 323,000 men out of Dunkirk in June, 1940, did it? I don't recall ever suggesting than Germany needed carriers, but the lack of surface escorts for their towed Sealion barges certainly ensured that Sealion, in the face of British naval supremacy, was never a realistic option. You do appear to have rather simplistic views. Thank you for educating me about the English Channel, however!
1
@websystema Many members of the German army staff planning Sealion thought of the Channel in your terms, until the Naval staff managed to get them to understand that crossing it was far more than an 'extended river crossing.' How many rivers, for example, have massive tidal changes and strong currents, or are subject to the kind of heavy weather common in the Channel? Battleships could, and did on occasion, operate in the Channel. You might read about Operation Medium in October, for a start. Not that the Admiralty had any intention of sending battleships or heavy cruisers against Sealion. Where towed barges were concerned, quick-firing 3 inch, 4 inch, 4.7 inch and 6 inch guns were likely to have been far more effective than 8 inch, 15 inch, or 16 inch ordnance. By September, 1940, the Germans had over 150 medium, heavy, and super-heavy guns lining the Channel coast. They fired regularly at targets of opportunity.' In the whole of WW2, these batteries hit only seven merchant ships, but sank none. By the way, when the Allies planned Overlord, what they primarily choose to use to silence those German batteries? Why, battleships of course. Own up. Either you are a wind-up merchant, simply remarkably ignorant of historical, or a kiddie excited by having played a game or two on your lap top. Time to come clean.
1
@websystema An attack on the Soviet Union was easier, simply because there were contiguous land borders between Soviet & German territory, where the army could be used. Unlike an attack against Britain, where the Germans needed a fleet which they simply did not have. The fact that the Germans massively underestimated the sort of resistance the Soviets would put up, and the immense difficulties of the campaign, does tend to explain why it ended in catastrophe, but it is not to the aborted Operation Sealion, as that idea was long gone by June, 1941.
1
@websystema 'keep in mind, that during 1942-1943 USA and Britain were very busy in Pacific.' Again, wrong. British and Commonwealth land forces were very busy in Burma, but the Pacific was the domain of the US Navy. The Royal Navy was at that time fighting, and winning, campaigns in the Arctic, the Atlantic, & the Mediterranean.
1
@websystema Oh dear. Singapore is part of the Malayan/Malaysian peninsula, bordered by the South China Sea to the east. Nothing I wrote about the Royal Navy in 1942 - 1943 is incorrect.
1
@websystema Indeed, I know about Wikipedia. I also know about a wide range of credible, academic, sources. Something which could never be claimed of wikipedia. What you appear to be claiming is akin to saying that the War on the Russian front, and the Italian campaign, were the same thing simply because they were on the same Continent. Still, at least you have given up on your inanely absurd comments about Sealion, and wandered off into equally ignorant comments about events further away. IIf you feel able to prove that my original comment, that 'British and Commonwealth land forces were very busy in Burma, but the Pacific was the domain of the US Navy. The Royal Navy was at that time fighting, and winning, campaigns in the Arctic, the Atlantic, & the Mediterranean,' was in any way inaccurate, then please try. Otherwise, I am done with you.
1
@websystema Good to observe that you have stopped posting your idiocies about Sealion, at least. Very sensible of you.
1
@websystema 'I still think that Germany had opportunities to occupy England in case if germans wanted.' It is axiomatic that, the less people actually know about the facts of Operation Sealion, the more they believe it was possible. 'combined with descent operations.' I assume you mean parachute drops? With the 4,500 paratroopers still available in September, 1940, after the heavy losses earlier in the year? From the 220 transport aircraft which Luftwaffe archives show as still being operational in late August, 1940? Small paratroop units with no hope of relife by ground forces? How do you think that that would turn out? ' in 1941-1942 on Sevastopol defence Soviets also had absolute naval superiority on Black Sea (dreadnoughts and cruisers - versus nothing on German side) but it didn't prevent capture of Crimea.' Perhaps you skimped on your Geography studies at school? Last time I looked, the Crimea was not an island, and towed barges were not needed to ferry German troops onto it.
1
@websystema 'in the next 1941 y, Germans had more than 6K aircrafts operational.' Have you ever thought of actually looking at Luftwaffe archives, ot do you simply make things up? Just for information, the following represents Luftwaffe Operational Strength in late August, 1940, with the figure in brackets that of late June, 1941 :- Single engined fighters : 787 (898) Twin engined fighters : 219 (105) Fighter bombers : 119 (124) Dive bombers : 294 (260) Twin engined bombers : 960 (931) Transport aircraft : 226 (212) There are other types, but not relevant to the point at issue. The RAF had 520 operational fighters in July, 1940, By May, 1941, the RAF had 53 fighter and fighter-bomber squadrons based in SE England alone, carrying out regular sweeps over NE France. In terms of overall aircraft production, the figures are as follows, with 1940 first and 1941 in brackets : Britain : 15,049 (20,094) Germany : 10,826 (11,776) In fact, Britain had been outproducing Germany in aircraft steadily since June 1940. Good luck using the Luftwaffe, which in reality during the whole of WW2 sank 31 RN destroyers, and no RN warship larger than a light cruiser, in your attempts to clear the Channel of the Royal Navy, by the way. Sorry to quote actual statistics from actual archives to you. I wouldn't want to disturb your charming fantasies for a moment.
1
'But what if the Germans did plan for it already in 1936? With more focus on naval bombers, minelayers, and landing crafts.' In 1936 the Germans did not know that they would have access to Dutch, Belgian, and French ports. For all they knew, they would face a repeat of the WW1 grinder that was the Western Front. In such circumstances, their naval resources would be trapped in the North Sea. What good would minelayers and landing craft be then? Even after June 1940, they still had no landing craft, only a ramshackle collection of barges towed by tugs or trawlers, with almost no operational surface ships to provide any escort. As for mines. The Germans had seven converted minelayers. The Royal Navy had, in addition to the fleet minesweepers of the Hunt & Halcyon clases, Grimsby class sloops, and most of the A-I class destroyers, also fitted for sweeping. This does not, of course, mention the large number of auxiliary minesweepers, converted from trawlers, drifters, and paddle steamers. Moreover, any German minelaying attempts would be made at night. Throughout September, the RN operated nightly destroyer patrols. Consider what is like to have happened when one of these patrols met any German minelayer. Forget aerial mines, by the way. They could only be laid in shallow water, and the Royal Navy had already found a method of neutralising any aircraft-dropped magnetic mines. What did happen, by the way, when the Luftwaffe did attack? A repeat of the German failure that was the attempt to prevent Operation Dynamo, almost certainly. Aside from the fact that the Luftwaffe could not operate at night, when the RN certainly could, the fact is that, in the whole of WW2, the Luftwaffe managed to sink 31 RN destroyers, and no RN warship at all larger than a light cruiser. To put that into perspective, in September, the RN had 70 destroyers and light cruisers, supported by some 400 or so smaller warships, within five hours steaming of Dover.
1
@niklaso1113 How do you support minelaying with aircraft when it could only be done at night? The German Type VIID boat could lay mines. Some 30 per boat. However, the first such boat only put to sea in November, 1941. Bit of a problem for Sealion, don't you think? 'Dynamo is a bad benchmark since most of the luftwaffe was occupied with helping the ground forces. Not by the time of the evacuation it wasn't. Goering even told hitler that the elimination of the Dunkirk pocket was 'a special job for the Luftwaffe.' It seems he was wrong.
1
@niklaso1113 So, you seriously suggest that the Germans concentrate entirely on an invasion of Britain, to the exclusion of, for example, France? Have you the faintest idea exactly how large the Royal Navy was at the time? Or, rather, how small the Kriegsmarine was? 'Could the luftwaffe hinder the RN to attack the german minelaying ships during daytime? I think so.' You think s? Oh good! Based upon what? Moreover, you clearly do not know precisely how many minesweepers the RN had available in 1940, and you haven't allowed for the obvious problem that daytime minelaying causes, which is that your enemy knows where your minefields are. Take, for example, the large defensive fields the Germans eventually managed to lay in the approaches to Normandy. In advance of Overlord, the Royal & Royal Canadian Navies were able to sweep them almost entirely in advance of the approaching assault ships. 'If stronger naval forces where on the way they could warn the minelaying ships to get away.' Brilliant! The minelayers available to the Germans, all seven of them, were capable of around 15 knots at best. A typical RN destroyer could manage at least 34, and a light cruiser 32. How would the minelayers escape from an enemy force capable of twice their speed?
1
By the end of 1939, the British had 1.1 million troops, and 1.5 million by mid 1940. Many of course were still being trained following their recent conscription.
1
The RN didn't because the barges never set forth. However, I sometimes have a vision of two German soldiers leaning over the side of their barge, throwing up. One sees a few grey shapes approaching at speed. He says to the other 'Look, Rolf. The Kriegsmarine is coming to escort us to the beaches,' as he watches the impending arrival of Captain Halsey's combined 16th & 18th Destroyer Flotillas from the Nore.
1
@walterCronkitesleftshoe6684 I apologise for my error. Exhaustive research by David Irving through German archives has revealed that the duck was called Frieda, not Friedrich. Irving has shown that it was a lady duck, which encouraged Hitler in his enlightened, pacifist, views.
1
That would still have involved invading Poland. Britain & France would still have declared war.
1
@BatMan-oe2gh Not really. Look at a map of Europe in 1939 for the reason.
1
@BatMan-oe2gh Finland didn't join in the invasion of Russia until Operation Barbarossa had begun. Are you seriously putting this forward as a possibility? Romania joined the Axis, but only after a coup in September, 1940. Yugoslavia made increasingly desperate attempts to remain neutral, before being invaded in April, 1941. Moreover, leaving a powerful and hostile Poland, with an army approaching 1 million strong, and increasing in size, would be militarily suicidal, whatever simply looking at a map and picking out the names of countries to the east of Germany might suggest.
1
@BatMan-oe2gh 'Operation Barbossa started in June 1941.Finland and Romania both joined the Invasion in June 1941. Yugoslavia was Invaded by Germany in April 1941 so German troops could cross Yugoslavia into Russia.' Poland was invaded in September, 1939, more than 18 months earlier, so your comment is meaningless. Whether those states would have become involved had Poland not been invaded is improbable, to say the least. As it was, most only did under duress, or after a coup. Finland simply latched their wagon onto Germany after the Winter War, and came to regret it. As, of course did Italy. Czechoslovakia did not exist after March, 1939. Guess what the Germans did with the Czech. armaments industry? They used many of the weapons it produced to invade Poland, and then Western Europe. Moreover, the invasion of Poland was part of a deal with the Soviet Union to divide the territory. Had Germany simply marched into the eastern European states you mention, don't you think that, just possibly, Uncle Joe might have been, ever so slightly, alarmed? 'Germany didn't Invade Russia till June 1941, not before.' Very good, well spotted. Only then, of course, because Germany was able to concentrate the bulk of her army & air force on the borders of Soviet territory. Where might that have been? Good heavens, in the part of Poland they had invaded in September, 1939, of course! If you really are 'just wondering' then perhaps you should wonder about something that was vaguely credible?
1
True. Dad's Army might be amusing, but it gives a rather false impression of the real Home Guard.
1