A "What If.." quesion.

[Angus]

The U.S. fleet did have a warning at Pearl, but didn't really respond to it. (Oh yes, the had a radar from the Brits if I recall right, and the Japanese aircraft were plotted inbound)
McArthur also had a reasonable warning in the Philippenes, since the air attack came well after Pearl and he already knew. Yet again, he was well to sleepy.
Poland got rolled up fairly easily. AFAIK France falling in about the same time was much more costly for the Germans. And remember, the push came through the lowlands, not straight into France (It was too well defended), and I am not sure the Germans had that much armour available in 1939.
Anyway, a good point about Stalin and Poland. The USSR actually went for the Polish when the Germans were only 2 weeks into the invasion, and had a fairly easy superiority. After all, it was not winter as they laterhad in Finland. So, IMHO, had Hitler rolled west on september the 1st, it would only have been a week or so before Stalin had rolled into Poland.
He actually let Hitler do a good bit of the job, I guess he could have moved earlier. What a Ba$-tard

[USRanger]

do you choose the red pill, or the blue pill?

Both.  I love how they interact.  Makes me feel all fuzzy.

[Furball]

Ignoring the state of the air defences.  I think the RN would have blown the invasion barges out of the water anyway - air superiority or not.  People are also ignoring Dunkirk, and the fact that the British Army would have been much better equipped, having not left most of their equipment in France/Belgium.

Having said that, the fighting spirit was helped massively by Churchill, who did not become PM until May 1940.  Had France fallen earlier without the British getting involved, would Chamberlain make peace with Hitler and perhaps fight a war against the commies alongside their German allies, as Hitler supposedly wanted?

[Angus]

Even if France had been conquered already in 1939, there would have been completely no chance for tugging barges across the channel before 1940.
The plan was not exactly on Hitlers wishlist, since he though the British could be "brought to reason" after the crushing victory of the Germans in Europe.
So basically, the invasion plan was a very vulnerable plan. Hence the BoB. If there was to be a chance tugging the troops across via barges, air superiority was essential. Not just that, because of the RN, some night-time  and even cloud-cover as well as fair currents and tides would be needed for the possibility alona as well as some element of surprize (to limit the time the RN would have had).
All in all, even with the conquest of France in the late fall of 1939, operation sealion would still have to take place either in the early spring or fall of 1940. And the fall of 1940.
Try to tug barges across under the nose of the RN, with the RAF buzzing all over would always have been a shooting gallery. The only chance would be to get them across almost all the way in a dark night, and the LW being able to both carry on the troops (paras) as well as shielding against naval encounters. You would never be able to get the whole invasion force across over night, just enough to secure some vital points. Just like Normandy.
So, the German planners were right. Shooting out the RAF would be a complete milestone.

[PiratPX]

I'm curious about the part of "England not being Germany's natural enemy" - as Hitler used to say. This and British politics directed at not upsetting Hitler at all cost could result in strange things. For example peace and anti-communist alliance after fall of France? I wonder Also, would Poland (by then in open war with Russia) join the alliance too? AFAIK Hitler considered making allies with Poland in mid 30's.

[oakranger]

Even if France had been conquered already in 1939, there would have been completely no chance for tugging barges across the channel before 1940.
The plan was not exactly on Hitlers wishlist, since he though the British could be "brought to reason" after the crushing victory of the Germans in Europe.
So basically, the invasion plan was a very vulnerable plan. Hence the BoB. If there was to be a chance tugging the troops across via barges, air superiority was essential. Not just that, because of the RN, some night-time  and even cloud-cover as well as fair currents and tides would be needed for the possibility alona as well as some element of surprize (to limit the time the RN would have had).
All in all, even with the conquest of France in the late fall of 1939, operation sealion would still have to take place either in the early spring or fall of 1940. And the fall of 1940.
Try to tug barges across under the nose of the RN, with the RAF buzzing all over would always have been a shooting gallery. The only chance would be to get them across almost all the way in a dark night, and the LW being able to both carry on the troops (paras) as well as shielding against naval encounters. You would never be able to get the whole invasion force across over night, just enough to secure some vital points. Just like Normandy.
So, the German planners were right. Shooting out the RAF would be a complete milestone.

Lets just point it this way, amphibious invasion are darn near impossible to achieved.  Vary few armies have achieved such a huge task and established a beach head.  Personally, even if Germany won the BoB in the air, i hardly think they could pull off a amphibious invasion.

[CAP1]

Lets just point it this way, amphibious invasion are darn near impossible to achieved.  Vary few armies have achieved such a huge task and established a beach head.  Personally, even if Germany won the BoB in the air, i hardly think they could pull off a amphibious invasion.

rule the air rule the ground.

[oakranger]

rule the air rule the ground.

Yea.  But i still do not think Germany would have the ability to successfully landed, established a beach head, and advance into deep England. 

[CAP1]

Yea.  But i still do not think Germany would have the ability to successfully landed, established a beach head, and advance into deep England. 

if they had ruled the skies, then they would more than likely been able to land troops, establish a beachhead, and make life very rough for the brits, before they managed to pushed them back.

[oakranger]

if they had ruled the skies, then they would more than likely been able to land troops, establish a beachhead, and make life very rough for the brits, before they managed to pushed them back.

Yes, i agree on that.  It would be tough for the Brits before they can push them back.

[mbailey]

I think even if they did try a landing, the Royal Navy would have chewed them to pieces, and if they had established a beach head, again the Royal Navy would have torn them to shreds. Hypothetically speaking that is.

[CAP1]

I think even if they did try a landing, the Royal Navy would have chewed them to pieces, and if they had established a beach head, again the Royal Navy would have torn them to shreds. Hypothetically speaking that is.

they wouldn't have been able to. if the germans had taken control of the skies over britain, then they would also have had control of the skies over the channel, thus preventing the navy from being able to get in there and stop the germans.

 even ruling the skies, the germans would've been pushed back into the channel, by un-acceptable losses, due to british determination. every man woman and child would've been fighting them, pushing them back.....but they'd have gotten that far though........again, this is just my opinion.

[mbailey]

I see your point of view and it is a very valid one. My thoughts were that if they were unable to hurt the Royal Navy (severely) during the evac at Dunkirk,( i believe that over the skies of Dunkirk they did have air superiorty) That yes, while the RN would have taken some losses, i think that the combined RAF/ RN could have kept it from happening, and it would not allowed them to establish a beach head. If one was established, again i think the power of the RN would have completly overwhelmed them.

Just my point of view of a ( what if ) question. The nice thing about these is that there is no wrong answer.

Great discussion gents

<S>
Mbailey

 

[CAP1]

I see your point of view and it is a very valid one. My thoughts were that if they were unable to hurt the Royal Navy (severely) during the evac at Dunkirk,( i believe that over the skies of Dunkirk they did have air superiorty) That yes, while the RN would have taken some losses, i think that the combined RAF/ RN could have kept it from happening, and it would not allowed them to establish a beach head. If one was established, again i think the power of the RN would have completly overwhelmed them.

Just my point of view of a ( what if ) question. The nice thing about these is that there is no wrong answer.

Great discussion gents

<S>
Mbailey

 

yes...it is a good discussion...and it's also amazing no one's gone off the handle yet. 

[Nisky]

Better question....What if the South won The Battle at Ghettysburg?

I think there is a book about it somewhere

" Guns of the South" it is a good read its a what if someone gave the confederates a crap ton of AK's.