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.
 
Zooming out, I wonder how many in today's generation (or previous - recent - ones) are even aware of the magnitude and human cost of WW II. They think the world is a different place today, but it isn't, not really. As long as humans are on this planet, there will be conflict. And if only for that reason, the old saying along the lines of "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" still applies.

Wars are fought differently today, but humans are still at the heart of it - for now.
 
This was indeed an epic battle. Germany was busy sinking merchant ships (mostly British) in the Atlantic at the same time as Germany attempted to enforce a blockade of UK.
Germany lacked a heavy bomber, and the front line fighter (ME-109) didn't have the range to loiter over England. Two significant strategic short comings. Also, Hitler was a hot-head and was so angered at the bombing of Berlin that he became de-focused from the original intent of the air battle over England, which was to destroy the RAF in preparation for a ground invasion. Hitler re-directed his bombing campaign towards London, taking the pressure off the RAF air fields... seen as a major blunder by most historians. The bombing of London just deepened the resolve of the British people, completely opposite of Hitler's intent.
 
CCJ said:
This was indeed an epic battle. Germany was busy sinking merchant ships (mostly British) in the Atlantic at the same time as Germany attempted to enforce a blockade of UK.
Germany lacked a heavy bomber, and the front line fighter (ME-109) didn't have the range to loiter over England. Two significant strategic short comings. Also, Hitler was a hot-head and was so angered at the bombing of Berlin that he became de-focused from the original intent of the air battle over England, which was to destroy the RAF in preparation for a ground invasion. Hitler re-directed his bombing campaign towards London, taking the pressure off the RAF air fields... seen as a major blunder by most historians. The bombing of London just deepened the resolve of the British people, completely opposite of Hitler's intent.
Click to expand...
Not to mention German air crews shot down were “lost”, RAF aircrews were safe and flying the following day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top