View Single Post
  #15 (permalink)  
Old April 27th, 2008, 12:17 AM
Tomcat's Avatar
Tomcat Tomcat is online now
WW2F Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Way down under
Posts: 1,362
Tomcat has a spectacular aura aboutTomcat has a spectacular aura about
Default Re: Chamberlain didn't give Sudetenland to Hitler.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bravo104 View Post
As I recall the building of the Bismarck was finished at the beginning of 1939. So they were allready there. They meant a real danger to the Royal Navy.
When t comes to the Tirpitz I do agree. She was finished in 1941.
Indeed they had no aircraftcarrier, butlooking at their plans to o to war, did they really need one? Hitlers goal was to overrun England and that was well in reach of France.
Finished yes but not fully commisioned until August 1940, one battleship could never hope to engage the RN in a battle, this was proven with the Bismarcks attempted sorte into the Atlantic. Aircraft Supremacy was seen in the Pacific and in the Atlantic, they were the new "capital" ships that would lead the world now, fighter and light bomber support over northern Britain or even extended time in the air for an Me109 over Britain would be helpful.



Quote:
Okay, good point there. But while destroyer technology developed they still couldn't really keep up the pace with Germany. Until the capture of teh Enigmamachine the royal navy was unable to break the code. So, a lucky find was a real turningpoint of the battle for the Atlantic.
When it comes to ships from America, the only thing I ever heard of is the Lend Lease of 46 aged destroyers. So, I have to look into it.
Very True, and I supose if you had more submarines you could do more damage, but I don't think that it would be enough to "starve" britain in submission.

The lending of ships was me just coming up with a possible tactic that the British could imply to avoid losses to the Uboats, since the Americans are neurtal, sinking them would be the same as declaring war on America, which would never have gone well.


Quote:
Hold on there. Looking back to the beginning of the war it's been a great shock to the rest of the world how for they had come in devoloping an army. Highly trained and well equipped.
And wasn't it during the first months the Allies took measures against germanys hunger for resources? Look at Norway.
I am not doubting that they had a well equipped and well trained military, that was very evident with the Blitzkrieg tactic, except of course for the horse drawn supplies problem, and the foot propelled infantry.
Norway, what do you mean?



Quote:
Let's keep it going then. I'm surely having a good time discussing what if's. They are totaly opposite of my opinion on most Items and they really make me think and wonder.
No problem then, I love discussions mate, I do like what ifs as well, as long as they don't turn into "what if germany had 15 battleships to take on the RN" realistic ones are the ones I like.

Oh I don't think they we are on a merry go round just yet, we are still exhanging differnet ideas.
__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget
Reply With Quote