|
Posted on 07/08/2005 9:58:33 PM PDT by snippy_about_it
|
|
 are acknowledged, affirmed and commemorated.
|
| Our Mission: The FReeper Foxhole is dedicated to Veterans of our Nation's military forces and to others who are affected in their relationships with Veterans. In the FReeper Foxhole, Veterans or their family members should feel free to address their specific circumstances or whatever issues concern them in an atmosphere of peace, understanding, brotherhood and support. The FReeper Foxhole hopes to share with it's readers an open forum where we can learn about and discuss military history, military news and other topics of concern or interest to our readers be they Veteran's, Current Duty or anyone interested in what we have to offer. If the Foxhole makes someone appreciate, even a little, what others have sacrificed for us, then it has accomplished one of it's missions. We hope the Foxhole in some small way helps us to remember and honor those who came before us.
|
 Assuming the Royal Air Force could have been defeated, or driven inland from forward bases in southeast England, could Operation Sealion have succeeded? Operation Sealion was the name given by Hitler for the planned invasion of Great Britain in 1940. Operation Sealion was never carried out during the war as the Germans lost the Battle of Britain and it is now believed that Hitler was more interested in the forthcoming attack on Russia as opposed to invading Britain.   When France collapsed, in mid-June 1940, the German staff had not even considered, never mind studied, the possibility of an invasion of Britain. Troops had received precisely zero training for seaborne and landing operations, and nothing had been done to gather the means of getting troops across the Channel. At the time, the balance of naval forces in the region were as follows:
In addition, the Royal Navy had countless smaller craft, including sloops, minesweepers, converted trawlers etc. These would have been of marginal value against warships. However, against the Rhine barges forming the main invasion transport force, they would have been effective. Thus, any Sealion which takes as its Point of Departure the premise that German forces attempted to cross in the immediate aftermath of Dunkirk has to answer the following questions:
If we turn our attention to point 3 for a while, the standard response is to say that the Luftwaffe could sink the Royal Navy ships. However, the Luftwaffe of the period had a pathetic record against warships. 39 Royal Navy destroyers took part in the Dunkirk evacuation. This operation required manoeuvring in a small harbour, with periods stationary while embarking troops. The Luftwaffe had command of the air for long periods. In these ideal conditions, the Luftwaffe managed to put out of commission a grand total of 4 destroyers. 4 out of 39 does not bode well for the Luftwaffe's chances. However, the most typical alternate history suggests that if the Luftwaffe had continued to attack the airfields of 11 Fighter Group, Sealion would have worked. We turn to the formal plan for Operation Sealion. The first instruction to begin planning was issued 2 July, giving 84 days before the invasion. (D-Day had been planned for 2 years). The Germans planned to lift 9 divisions (D-Day had 5). In Normandy, the Allies had total naval and air superiority, a host of special equipment, considerable hard-won experience, and a considerable level of support and assistance from the local population. Despite facing defenders that can be most charitably described as second-line, the Allied forces did not have an easy time on D-Day. Amphibious combined operations require close co-operation between the various branches. The Germans did not have this. The Wehrmacht wanted a broad-front landing (it proposed Ramsgate to Portand - 275 miles). The Wehrmacht expected the Kriegsmarine to carry out a landing on this massive front in the face of an overwhelming superior navy, with no transport fleet yet assembled. The Wehrmacht document stated: "The Luftwaffe will do the work of artillery, while the Kriegsmarine will do the work of engineers." Meanwhile, the Kriegsmarine were displaying a similar level of understanding of the needs of the Wehrmacht. It stated that the time between first landing and the second wave of reinforcements and supplies would be 8-10 days. Thus 9 Wehrmacht divisions, without any heavy equipment or resupply, would be expected to hold out against the 28 divisions in Britain, which had unlimited access to supplies and the available equipment. Hitler called a meeting on 31 July to decide among the various options. The Luftwaffe did not attend this meeting, although it was recognised that the Luftwaffe was essential to win air supremacy and to keep the Royal Navy out of the way. The Kriegsmarine proposed landing 10 infantry regiments at Folkestone, because a broad front would be impossible to protect. The Wehrmacht did not like this. The discussion moved on to purely army matters, so Raeder left the meeting. In Raeder's absence, Hitler announced that he favoured a broad front approach. It was not made clear what the Luftwaffe was expected to do. On 1 August, Hitler told the Wehrmacht and the Kriegsmarine that an essential prerequisite was that the Luftwaffe gain "Total domination of the air." The Luftwaffe, however, was told by Hitler on the same day that it had to achieve "Temporary or local air superiority." Examples of such total lack of co-operation abound. sym·po·sium : a social gathering at which there is free interchange of ideas So now let's get on with the discussion. Pull up a chair or grab a spot on the floor around the virtual Foxhole Cabin and let's chat.      |
Good morning, Snippy and everyone at the Freeper Foxhole.
Good morning
"Sea Lion" represents, to my way of thinking, the perfect illustration of Eisenhower's maxim. "Every war will astonish you," Ike said, and he was absolutely right: for Hitler, the nightmarish notion that he would have to put the highly theoretical "Sea Lion" into actual practice was an astonishment he never quite got over.
For Hitler, the war against Britain & France had truly been the "wrong war, in the wrong place, against the wrong enemy, at the wrong time" by his estimate: he'd counted on the Western Allies to murmur and whine around a bit about his adventures in Poland, and then back down. He never took their "Polish Guarantees" seriously--not for one second. And why should he have? From the unilateral abrogation of Versailles (rearmament), to the march back into the Rhineland, to Anschluss he'd had his way against weak Western powers and their feeble politicians for years.
The "Sitzkrieg" or phony war was Hitler's estimation of it also, at least as regards Great Britain. He never thought they would hang in, especially after the German Army marched into Paris. Sitting there, after the Fall of France and the ignominy of Dunkirk sent the English scurrying back to their Isle (from his point of view; it was actually one of the most heroic & nation-saving retreats ever), Hitler found the notion that they would continue to resist flabbergasting.
The article mentions that "Sea Lion" had been on the drawing board for two years; and indeed it had. But it was never taken seriously by the one person in the German Chain-of-Command whose opinion ultimately mattered: the Commander-in-Chief of the German Armed Forces.
And here we come to one of the key flaws (among several) in Hitler's strategy in dealing with the Western Powers: he thought he was doing them a favor by being the "bulwark" against Russian Bolshevism, and was irritated that they didn't quite seem to have the wisdom to recognize it. He never grasped the concept that we, the Western Powers, saw him in an evil light quite indistinguishable from his ally and cohort in the conquest of Poland, Joseph Stalin. Worse, in fact: Germany had a history in the World War business only twenty years past, whereas Russia, communist or not, didn't.
So "Sea Lion," IMHO, was, despite its pedigree, never a serious consideration. The truth is the conflict with England bored Hitler, as things we never expect to have to deal with in life often do. So he turned the thing over to Goering looking for a "quick fix," of sorts, and when the brave men of the Royal Air Force put an end to that as a viable solution, he turned his gaze back towards the East and went for it. He saw himself, after all, as the "hero" in a struggle against the "International Jewish-Bolshevist Conspiracy"*; and he expected the British to, if not join, at least acquiesce in that "reality." That struggle of his fevered dreams & visions commenced on June 22, 1941; and it was one that ultimately doomed his "Thousand-Year Reich" and consigned it, thankfully, to the ash heap of history.
"Sea Lion" could never have succeeded because the man whom would have been its ultimate implementor never really believed in it, and would've found any excuse to call it off at any stage of its actual implementation whenever and wherever setbacks or serious military reverses might have been encountered.
Just my ever-humble $0.02. :)
*About the "Bolshevist" part of his rants he was on to something, as later events in the Cold War would prove; the rest of it was rank nonsense, tied to his own filthy, murderous antisemitism.
This isn't new to our century. In the 5th century BC, King Ahasuerus of Persia refused to allow mourners to enter his gates (Esther 4:1-2). One commentator suggests that he preferred to surround himself with people who were awed by his wealth and were eager to attend his lavish parties (1:4). His reluctance to be bothered by bad news nearly resulted in the annihilation of the Jewish people. Contrast the leadership of Ahasuerus with that of Jesus, who said, "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matthew 11:28). Ahasuerus ruled his kingdom by allowing only happy people to enter his presence. Jesus builds His kingdom by welcoming the burdened and sorrowful into His presence. What's more, Jesus not only invites us to tell Him our bad news, He has the willingness and the power to turn our most troubling circumstances into a celebration of praise. —Julie Ackerman Link
Disturbed and quite unblest, Until I trusted Jesus; Now faith has giv'n me rest. —Bosch The gospel is bad news to those who reject it and good news to those who receive it.
The Lord Is My Shepherd |
On This Day In History
Birthdates which occurred on July 09:
1766 J Schopenhauer,
1802 Thomas Davenport invented 1st coml electric motor
1819 Elias Howe Spencer Mass, invented sewing machine
1856 Nikola Tesla, Croatia, electrical engineer/inventor (Tesla Coil)
1858 Franz Boas anthropologist/linguist (Mind of Primitive Man) (Al Franken?)
1887 Samuel Eliot Morison historian (Admiral of the Ocean Sea)
1901 Barbara Cartland romance author
1908 Minor White, abstract photographer, was born
1915 David Diamond Rochester NY, composer (Paderewski Prize-1943)
1916 Edward Heath (C) British PM (1970-74)
1927 Ed Ames Malden Mass, actor (Mingo-Daniel Boone)
1929 Hassan II king of Morocco (1961- )
1929 Lee Hazelwood Ok, country singer/songwriter (Summer Wine, Jackson)
1932 Donald Rumsfeld politician (Sec DoD.)
1938 Brian Dennehy Ct, actor (Silverado-Sheriff Cobb, To Catch a Killer-John Wayne Gacy, Cocoon-Walter,)
1939 James Hampton Okla City OK, actor (Bugler Dobbs-F Troop)
1939 Richard Roundtree New Rochelle NY, actor (Shaft, Roots)
1943 John H Casper Greenville SC, Col USAF/astronaut (STS-36, sk:STS-50)
1945 Dean R[ay] Koontz, US, sci-fi author
1946 Mitch Mitchell drummer (Jimi Hendrix Experience)
1947 O(renthal) J(ames) Simpson SF, NFL running back (Buf Bills)/actor/murderer
1952 John Tesh Garden City NY, TV host (Entertainment Tonight)
1954 Debbie Sledge Phila, vocalist (Sister Sledge-We are Family)
1955 Jimmy Smits NYC, actor (Victor-LA Law, Running Scared, Believers)
1956 Tom Hanks Concord, Calif, actor (Bossom Buddies, Big, Applo 13, Saving Pvt. Ryan...)
1957 Kelly McGillis Newport Beach Ca, actress (Top Gun, Accused, Witness)
1976 Fred Aaron Savage Ill, actor (Kevin-Wonder Years, Vice Versa)
1979 in a small humble 2 up 1 down splitlevel logcabin one Bethbg79 is born. And why should you care? OH the stories I could tell...like the time she went to a party...well lets just leave that for your imagination as this is a family friendly place, but we'll just say there are those who still just shake their heads and walk away. It is also reported that her mother was born on the same day. Coincidence you say, weeeell if you say so.
"The first sign of maturity is the discovery that the volume knob also turns to the left"
Hi miss Feather.
So much to report, so little time:
Bittygirl has learned to open two of the four baby gates we have.
Yesterday she took my dirty socks and put them away in my sock drawer for me.
Last night she discovered fried catfish is a a delicacy to be savored.
Last night she also discovered chocolate pudding to a little bowl of heaven.
That Hitler fellow was a practicioner of the FM style of military planning.
Politely translatted:
FM = freakin' magic
Our pal Radio Astronomer is familiar with his work.
How's about a blast from the past while I'm at it and feelin' in a good mood today. :-)
Radar O'Reilly heard to excalim, "Ah, Keppler".
Bittygril seen to exclaim, "0000000000000000000000".
Saturday Afternoon Bump for the Freeper Foxhole Saturday Symposium.
No Pigeon Pad Pic today, have been working on getting the slide installed, which I did and a few minor things that needed to be squared away. I hope to get the monkey bars in this afternoon and then I will be done.
Regards Operation Sealion, had the NAZIs launched an invasion of Great Britian as soon as France had fallen. I would have given the NAZIs about a 40% chance of success. Both the Royal Navy and Royal Airforce would have made it very diffucult for the NAZIs to get across the Channel in force. Nothing like fighting to protect your homeland.
However if the NAZIs were able to gain a significant lodgemant on British soil then the odds of NAZI succes do go up to about 60%. The key to the NAZIs taking England would have been to get 2 to 3 Panzer divisions ashore realatively intact. This would be no small feat for a miltary with no practice in amphiboouus ops.
The British Army right after Dynamo was without much of it's heavy equipment not to mention even small arms, plus the British tactical methods of the times were not up to the NAZIs, IMHO. To the advantage of the Brits, though you have interior lines of communication, fighting on your turf, and the ability to deploy the RAF from airfields outside of the range of effective Luftwaffe action.
More thought later
Regards
alfa6 ;>}
Good afternoon Aeronaut.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
The unwillingness to listen to bad news has been blamed for everything from space shuttle disasters to corporate collapses to the spread of terrorism. Lengthy studies aren't needed to determine why this happens. Bad news reveals problems; problems require solutions; solutions cost time, money, and energy we would rather spend celebrating past successes. 