testtest

Battle of Britain: Myth vs. Reality

EVERY nation over states its victories, part of it is for the home front and part to confound the enemy. Germany discovered the problem of "distance" meaning limited fighter cover but also because the Brits were fighting over a friendly space. They could crash the plane and have the pilot back in the air tomorrow. Germany never developed a four engine bomber. They had four engine planes but never a bomber. Their tactics were to use the Luftwaffe as a tactical rather than strategic force. The Stuka was essentially "guided" artillery rather than a bomber. The bombing of cities, especially London, (by accident or intent), caused Britain to focus on German cities and brought the war home to Germany Whatever the "myth" Germany stopped attacking Britain and turned its eyes east.
 
Good article, but one quibble. Like common misunderstandings about the battle of Britain, there is a big misunderstanding about German ground operations. That is, there was no such thing as "blitzkrieg" in German doctrine. In its day it was simply known as a war of movement. The term blitzkrieg came about because of the short time it took to beat Poland and France. Instead of months or years it took weeks. As a military historian noted, if one visits the German Armor School today and mentions "blitzkrieg" as a doctrine they'll correct you in a very stern manner.
 
An interesting article that with the benefit of hindsight makes a potential German invasion of Britain seem unlikely. The reality for Britons like my parents, who huddled in their respective childhood bomb shelters in the East End of London - one of the hardest hit parts of London - repelling the Germans hardly seemed like a slam dunk.
 
Back
Top