|
|
|
|
a very good article https://www.military-his...a-german-perspective.htm“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”
-Mark Twain
|
|
|
 Rank: Super-Elite      Groups: Registered
Joined: 17/12/2013 Posts: 3,982 Points: 11,974 Location: NY, USA
|
That article doesnt agree with a lot of what I have read on the battle of Britain.The Luftwaffe had massive advantages in number of planes and pilots compared to the RAF.The ability to rescue the pilots from the Channel and put them back in the air helped the RAF too.
carl
|
|
|
|
|
darbyvet wrote:That article doesnt agree with a lot of what I have read on the battle of Britain.The Luftwaffe had massive advantages in number of planes and pilots compared to the RAF.The ability to rescue the pilots from the Channel and put them back in the air helped the RAF too.
carl
I totally agree and there is no doubt the RAF had its back against the wall, I dont think the article takes anything away from what the RAF did or the bravery of the pilots to say nothing of the huge efforts of the supporting ground crews to keep pilots and machines in the air
but we must not forget a lot of 'public history' is propaganda based, like the Spitfire winning the battle of Britain when you can strongly argue it was the Hurricane.
Like the Germans being the most advanced army in the world when the BEF got kicked out of France, it wasn't the British army was the only fully mechanised army in the world at that point German tactics were superior.
Like the T-34 being a revolution due to sloped armour, it wasn't it took the idea from German armoured cars
Like the U-boat offensive and its effectiveness in the battle of the Atlantic, but actually they were less successful than the WW1 U-boat deployments
All the above comes out of propaganda of the time, need to keep public opinion where it was needed to support the war effort.
I agree with the article that the Ability of Germany to invade Britain did not just hang on air superiority, troops had to cross the channel and the Royal Navy was the biggest issue, Churchill new this thats why he sunk the French fleet to keep sea power on our side.
I disagree with the article on the point that the battle was insignificant however, it had a huge moral effect at a time when everybody in the UK expected an invasion, it spurred a nation on to keep fighting. But more than that Hitler hoped the threat of invasion the massing of troops and knocking out the RAF would get Britain to capitulate, that was his real aim and Hitler got quite close to achieving it Halifax and others in the cabinet were all for coming to terms, I think the article misses that point but offers a very interesting German view like the poor tactics, the fear of the Channel and the shortage of aircraft or possibly pilots?“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”
-Mark Twain
|
|
|
 Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,827 Points: -13,348
|
The article saying that the importance of the Battle of Britain is ‘exaggerated’ and “insignificant’ to the war in general is as barking mad as was Hitler himself!
No exaggeration, Britain defeated the Luftwaffe!
The significance of the Battle of Britain was that it the first major campaign to be fought entirely by air forces, and was also the largest and most sustained aerial bombing campaign to that date. The Battle of Britain also marked the first defeat of Hitler's military forces.
Bad timing to post such an article at the point of RAF100 where we should be celebrating the achievements of the RAF.
|
|
|
|
|
You say the German Army's tactics were better than any other army's yet the french and british army's stopped them dead with tank attacks. The only tactics that made the German Army better was the fact that many of them were high on crystal meth or 'Pervitin' as the brand was known then, meth lets you go for hours without rest and gives you that god like feeling of invincibility a sure fire way of overwhelming the other side. The germans had to set up special hospitals to ween the troops of meth so not the best idea and Hitlers personal doctor was giving the boss a dose daily so no wonder he was off in lala land by the end of the war. http://www.spiegel.de/in...rld-war-ii-a-901755.htmlCurrent builds:-C57,Zero, Lamborghini Countach, Caldercraft HMS Agamemnon,Robi,R2-D2, MFH Cobra .
|
|
|
|
|
The only tactics that made the German Army better was the fact that many of them were high on crystal meth or 'Pervitin' as the brand was known then, meth lets you go for hours without rest and gives you that god like feeling of invincibility a sure fire way of overwhelming the other side If you think the German army was effecyive because of drugs i fear your the one in lala land “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”
-Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,827 Points: -13,348
|
jase wrote:If you think the German army was effecyive because of drugs i fear your the one in lala land They certainly were in La-La Land when it came to the Battle of Britain  
|
|
|
|
Guest (2)
|
US
