Comments by "John Burns" (@johnburns4017) on "Could US military conquer UK if it wanted to? (2019)" video.

  1. In this war game,the US would never make a successful beach landing.
    4
  2.  @Rockhound6165  The Germans in 1940 had zero chance of winning in the air or mount an invasion. Stop looking at lousy History Channel documentaries.
    1
  3. Nigel Heather The Germans in 1940 had zero chance of winning in the air or mount an invasion. Stop looking at lousy History Channel documentaries.
    1
  4.  @nheather  I am not going into the blow by blow whys. Just take it as gospel. A few hints for you: The RAF had more planes at the end of the Battle of Britain than the beginning. The Royal Navy was the largest in the world and massive. The German surface fleet was near wiped out in Norway. Take it from there.
    1
  5.  @nheather  Germany had no realistic ability to overrun the UK. The British knew what sort of chance the Germans had. The reason the Germans had no chance was that the British were ready and waiting with factories turning out the latest equipment 24/7. During the so-called _Battle of Britain_, the Royal Navy had a mass of ships at Gibraltar ready for offensive operations against the Italians, they took the invasion of Britain really so seriously. The German Navy was near non-existent. The single battleship the British kept in Portsmouth was quite able to handle everything the Germans had on the surface, together with the four flotillas of destroyers. I'm not counting the Home Fleet, which had additional powerful ships. In other words, the British kept plenty of naval force at home. All they needed to deal with the Germans with a good deal to spare. Also, 55 Matilda 2 tanks, which was immune to German anti-tank guns, were sent to North Africa, the Brits took the invasion so seriously. Admiral Raeder said he could not guarantee putting down an invasion force, even with German air superiority, when the Royal Navy was still there. General Jodl talked of his men going through a British _mincing machine_. In Churchill's memoirs, he says that he was prepared to defeat tens of thousands of Germans if they invaded (take that as slaughter). Presumably even if they arrived with weapons and not half-dead from seasickness in a 24 hour sea trip in barges being attacked from sea, land and air. The British kept plenty of force at home, all they needed. And what were the Germans supposed to do? Sortie with two or three heavy cruisers, and blast their way through the Home Fleet or the Channel defences? At that point in the war, Bismarck was still under construction, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were under repair from the Norway operation, two of six heavy cruisers sunk, two of six light cruisers sunk, and only five of those could be considered modern warships, a large number of their destroyers were sunk at Narvik. The repair status on the rest of the ships wasn't real good. The Germans never even had an effective torpedo plane. The Stuka dive bomber was predictable in that it dived vertically. It was easily shot down and suffered so many losses in the Battle of Britain it was withdrawn from the battle. So, with the German navy whittled to almost nothing, and the army incapable of crossing with enough force to win, the only threats was the then small U-boats force and the Luftwaffe. The British were therefore sparing about sending the RAF overseas. I don't know of any significant deployment of Spitfires outside the UK until the second half of 1942, and escort vessels kept on being built. The RAF defeated the Luftwaffe over Dunkirk, so the Germans knew they were no push over. If anyone thinks that operation Sealion was a serious attempt at an invasion they are deluded. Even German generals never took it seriously. An invasion in concrete barges towed by tugs and no navy to speak of? The Germans knew the UK had a large industry working 24/7, the same size as Germany's, and the largest navy in the world to their virtually none. The RAF was large with a large bomber force, which the Germans could not knock out. Any invasion at the few suitable invasion beaches would be met at the beaches by all types of aircraft. These could be based out of Me 109 range. State-of-the-art fighters would still be produced 24/7. There would always be top line fighters around. According to Guderian in "Panzer Leader", and by pretty much any historian to follow, Sealion (Zee Lowe?) could succeed only with complete air superiority over the invasion areas, and at least naval equality in the Channel. Hence the air Battle of Britain, hard fought and clearly won by Britain. Naval equality was a pipe dream for Germany, but a pipe smoked only if the Luftwaffe could attain a decisive victory. Given the failure of the prerequisite, there is really no point in debating the if Germans could invade the UK.
    1
  6.  @MrCannonball2010  The event would not be anywhere like this video. Britain's defences would have at least quadrupled in any build up to hostilities. Also Canada would probably be on the UKs side. Also the threat of the USA being nuked would keep them, and the Russians, away. Britain's nuclear deterrent is very cheap. No massive big conventional military to pay for. The size of the USA's military is to keep their military-industrial complex rolling, as it is a massive part of the American economy. It is far too big for their needs.
    1
  7. 1800s? War of 1812. The British won.
    1
  8.  @AJ-cv9zf  Canada was a part of Britain so to say.
    1
  9.  @SuperDeuser  Britain achieved it aims of ejecting the invaders from Canada. The USA did not achieve its invading aims. The British won. How simple do you want it?
    1
  10.  @SuperDeuser  The point is 1812. The British achieved their aim of ejecting the invaders from Canada and securing its borders, with the new USA having to give compensation. The British won. Everything was at their dictates. The British had no desires on US territory. The British took the war right into the USA, even burning down the White House.
    1
  11.  @SuperDeuser  Britain made more money from Jamaica than all 13 colonies in North America combined. The revolutionary war was considered not worth pursuing. Again they had to pay compensation to Britain.
    1
  12.  @SuperDeuser  It was not the USA at the time. It was an internal rebellion in British America, that had to be put down. The only reasons it succeeded: 1. The Spanish & French got involved in an internal dispute. 2. The British in the end thought it was not worth it economically. BTW, most people in British America were not for the rebels.
    1
  13.  @SuperDeuser  An excuse for what?
    1
  14. The Royal Navy is the most technically advanced navy in the world. A few hits on US cities would prevent troops, plane and ships taking part keeping them in the USA. Also the forces are as they are now. If there was tension with the USA British forces would be increased rapidly with anti-aircraft and ships capability increased. If the US were anywhere near taking the UK nuclear bombs would be dropping on the USA. Their choice.
    1
  15.  @timon3211  The nuclear deterrent is via submarines. The 4 subs can launch 768 nuclear warheads at the USA. If half got through their would not be much left of the USA. Their choice.
    1
  16.  @timon3211  The UKs nuclear deterrent was given over to the navy decades ago. Duh!
    1
  17.  @didyouhear111  Cripple economically? Sure. One reason and advantage of the EU was to economically get the USA out of their hair. WW2 made the USA rich, nothing else. BTW, 48% of American receive welfare of some description.
    1
  18.  @gamingwithcali823  How old are you? The UK has the ability make the USA wasteland.
    1
  19.  @gamingwithcali823  48%
    1
  20.  @gamingwithcali823  I will stop communicating with a child.
    1
  21.  @gamingwithcali823  Nutball, the UK can raze the USA. Get it? I doubt it.
    1