Could Svalbard (Spitzbergen) have been a good place to launch an invaison of Europe from( by that I mean the point of supply HQ and so on)? I have mixed thoughts about it and also the fact that I am not familiar with the Terrain of Norway but I would still like other peoples thoughts about it. I am aware that with Sweden is on Norways rump; all the way down to its face.

There is precious little information about Svalbard being occupied or not so im not the wiser. All I have read was operation Gauntlet *sigh* on Wikipedia.

__________________
"The perfect Aryan is as tall as Goebbels, as fit as Goering, as blond as Hitler, as handsome as Himmler and has a name such as Rosenberg."
"

Have you looked at a map in relation to where Great Britain and Norway are in relation to eachother? Where would the Allies invade and engage the German forces? Through Finland or across the North Sea to Denmark? Not to mention the distance. And the terrain is horrible for fighting in. The Channel crossing was of course much shorter and faster.

__________________


For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

Too far away, inhospitable terrain, poor- to non-existent facilities and a disastrous campaign in 1940 would have made the idea a complete non-starter.....

__________________
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

The Norwegian route was one that Churchill often had to be distracted from, seemed to have a bit of a bee in his bonnet about it. There's a fair few examples of exasperation throughout Alanbrooke's diaries when WSC would raise the subject and have to have the reasons against re-stated.

Cheers,
Adam.

__________________
It's only the Internet.

Oh well, still though does Norway have many mountains in its northern sector? Another downer is that the only real "city" in that area would be Hammerfest(if my sources are correct). But what I really wanted to know is if there was nay positives if it was chosen.

__________________
"The perfect Aryan is as tall as Goebbels, as fit as Goering, as blond as Hitler, as handsome as Himmler and has a name such as Rosenberg."
"

as said before, invade Norway and do what ? are you thinking of pounding right through neutral Sweden or going around the coming through the northern part of the Soviet Union - don't think they would appreciate that

France was logical as it was and is the stepping off point right into the heart of Germany

Exactly. There was no direct way to get at the German army through Norway. It would only work a diversion and a poor one at that.

__________________


For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

Also, it'd warn the Germans where the invasion was coming and when they got to Europe, they'd sure as hell be prepared.



Cheers...

Like I said before. Just looking at a map shows alot about what would go wrong trying to invade Europe through Norway.Terrain,Distance,Weather,not enough suitable ports,no way to engage major German units, Sweden in the way, longer time to get to mainland Europe. The list can go on.

__________________


For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

Churchill sure was full of good ideas. Why not Gallipoli Mk.2 while he was at it?

__________________