Hitler's Worst Mistake

[Lord Baal]

This is so incredible wrong... There was absolutly no way, in which the British would capitulate or negotiate peace with Germany, They would have move the goverment to Canada or India, or the US and continue the fighting, they still had the powerful Royal Navy. The only way that would have make them capitulate is some type of Putsch against the old British lion (Churchill of course), but I can't think of that either.

All the things wrong with his post, and you pick that?! How about the fact tht it was physically impossible for Germany to invade Britain in the first place?

If the British Isles did fall, in some magical universe where Hitler conjures up a fleet using black magic, there's a pretty good chance that Britain would capitulate. There would be a government-in-exile of course, but the majority of British industry was located in the British Isles. Without that industry, even the might of the British Empire couldn't preserve British independence in the future. Short of the US, Britain would have no hope, and a puppet regime under Mosley would likely rule over the UK proper.

 

[Volum]

There's so many things you can point to about why Sealion wouldn't work you could probably spend an entire day.

What about landing craft? We use Rhine barges!
Wont they be easily tipped over in the channel? Nonsense, we only use them when the sea is calm!
What about reinforcements if the weather changes? Im sure it will work out!
What about tanks? Rhine Barges, one tank at a time!
What about supplies? Rhine Barges!
How do we protect them from the Royal navy? We mine the entrances to the channel!
What about the fleet in the channel? I'm sure the barges can avoid them somehow!
What about the RAF? Luftwaffe!
What if the royal navy attacks the landing? Luftwaffe!
What about artillery? Luftwaffe, flying artillery!
Won't that be a bit much for the Luftwaffe? No no, Goering said they could take care of it easily!

 

[Lord Baal]

There's so many things you can point to about why Sealion wouldn't work you could probably spend an entire day.

What about landing craft? We use Rhine barges!
Wont they be easily tipped over in the channel? Nonsense, we only use them when the sea is calm!
What about reinforcements if the weather changes? Im sure it will work out!
What about tanks? Rhine Barges, one tank at a time!
What about supplies? Rhine Barges!
How do we protect them from the Royal navy? We mine the entrances to the channel!
What about the fleet in the channel? I'm sure the barges can avoid them somehow!
What about the RAF? Luftwaffe!
What if the royal navy attacks the landing? Luftwaffe!
What about artillery? Luftwaffe, flying artillery!
Won't that be a bit much for the Luftwaffe? No no, Goering said they could take care of it easily!

That needs to be part of a comedy routine.

 

[LightSpectra]

That's honestly not even half of it. Overlord was five divisions landing against an uncoordinated enemy, planned for several years with a very specific command structure, naval supremacy and air superiority, with significant heavy machinery and aid from the French. Seelöwe was planned for a few months with seven divisions landing in hostile territory with the German naval, land and aerial commands all laughing each other out of the room, with the enemy having naval supremacy and air superiority, without any of the necessary equipment.

I was planning on writing an article called "Top 25 Reasons why Unternehmen Seelöwe would've been a Disaster," but really not much needs to be said beyond any of the above.

 

[Dragonlord]

There's so many things you can point to about why Sealion wouldn't work you could probably spend an entire day.

What about landing craft? We use Rhine barges!
Wont they be easily tipped over in the channel? Nonsense, we only use them when the sea is calm!
What about reinforcements if the weather changes? Im sure it will work out!
What about tanks? Rhine Barges, one tank at a time!
What about supplies? Rhine Barges!
How do we protect them from the Royal navy? We mine the entrances to the channel!
What about the fleet in the channel? I'm sure the barges can avoid them somehow!
What about the RAF? Luftwaffe!
What if the royal navy attacks the landing? Luftwaffe!
What about artillery? Luftwaffe, flying artillery!
Won't that be a bit much for the Luftwaffe? No no, Goering said they could take care of it easily!

Love this!

That's honestly not even half of it. Overlord was five divisions landing against an uncoordinated enemy, planned for several years with a very specific command structure, naval supremacy and air superiority, with significant heavy machinery and aid from the French. Seelöwe was planned for a few months with seven divisions landing in hostile territory with the German naval, land and aerial commands all laughing each other out of the room, with the enemy having naval supremacy and air superiority, without any of the necessary equipment.

I was planning on writing an article called "Top 25 Reasons why Unternehmen Seelöwe would've been a Disaster," but really not much needs to be said beyond any of the above.

All true - though I'd like to point out that, IF the German Army had managed to cross the Channel somehow, Britain would have been in very dire straits. The BEF left all its' heavy equipment at Dunkirk, so, for a time, the defenders would have had very few heavy weapons.
It should also be noted that there was a real possibility of Germany getting its' hands on the French fleet, which might have been enough to secure local naval superiority for an invasion. Which is why the British sank it in harbor, of course - quite a low blow against an erstwhile ally, but totally necessary.

That still left the problem of landing craft, of course. Rhine barges, indeed...

All in all, Seelöwe was a very long shot - but not totally impossible under all the right circumstances. Once it was clear air superiority couldn't be achieved and minus the French fleet, there wasn't the proverbial snowball's chance in Hell, of course.

 

[say1988]

quite a low blow against an erstwhile ally

Vichy France was neutral, not an ally at all, though it did piss of the Free French, which was their ally.

All true - though I'd like to point out that, IF the German Army had managed to cross the Channel somehow, Britain would have been in very dire straits.

You missed one exceedingly hard thing, maintain a supply line across the channel under the RAF and RN guns.

 

[Lord Baal]

Love this!



All true - though I'd like to point out that, IF the German Army had managed to cross the Channel somehow, Britain would have been in very dire straits. The BEF left all its' heavy equipment at Dunkirk, so, for a time, the defenders would have had very few heavy weapons.
It should also be noted that there was a real possibility of Germany getting its' hands on the French fleet, which might have been enough to secure local naval superiority for an invasion. Which is why the British sank it in harbor, of course - quite a low blow against an erstwhile ally, but totally necessary.

That still left the problem of landing craft, of course. Rhine barges, indeed...

All in all, Seelöwe was a very long shot - but not totally impossible under all the right circumstances. Once it was clear air superiority couldn't be achieved and minus the French fleet, there wasn't the proverbial snowball's chance in Hell, of course.

Actually, even if Germany had achieved local naval superiority with the assistance of the French Fleet - in itself unlikely, as while the French Fleet was the fourth largest in the world, the Royal Navy was the lrgest, and could take them in a straight-up fight - the Germans would still have been thrown back into the sea. Ad-hoc as British anti-invasion plans were - they'd never expected the Germans to perform so well, so had not prepared for the eventuality at all - they were still more than enough to prevent a successful German invasion. They were, to put it bluntly, also pretty damn brutal, involving such wonderful (and illegal) things as mustard gas.

Germany wasn't really capable of amphibious invasions. They got lucky in both Norway and Crete, the only amphibious invasions they launched against opposition. The British withdrew from the Channel Islands rather than try to defend them when they were closer to France than Britain, giving Germany aerial superiority.

In Crete the Germans were being beaten decisively until some New Zealand troops, under the mistaken impression that they were facing a significantly greater number of paratroopers than they actually were, withdrew from a strategic position, giving the Germans control of the local airfield. The Germans then rushed in reinforcements and supplies. They also had local aerial superiority over Crete, which, like the Channel Islands, was closer to German Continental airfields than British ones.

In Norway the Germans were assisted somewhat by the fact that Quisling provided some political and military support - though far, far less than he'd promised - and the fact that the Royal Navy simply wasn't in the area at the time. Even then the Germans suffered heavy losses; I believe they lost the use about a third of their surface fleet during the invasion, though most of it was salvageable. They also benefited from Churchill's poor strategy to counter them; he concentrated on taking Narvik, which he did, when he should have denied the Germans the men and materiel to maintain their grip on the city, forcing their withdrawal. The Germans also never fully captured Norway; its mountainous terrain was perfect for guerrilla activities, which continued until the end of the war.

What these two invasions proved was that the expenditure necessary for the Germans to launch a successful invasion over the sea was far in excess of what was needed to fight them off. And Britain was a much tougher nut to crack than Norway or Crete.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_anti-invasion_preparations_of_World_War_II

 

[Dragonlord]

Vichy France was neutral, not an ally at all, though it did piss of the Free French, which was their ally.


You missed one exceedingly hard thing, maintain a supply line across the channel under the RAF and RN guns.

To the first: that's why I said 'erstwhile' ally. To the second: quite right.

Actually, even if Germany had achieved local naval superiority with the assistance of the French Fleet - in itself unlikely, as while the French Fleet was the fourth largest in the world, the Royal Navy was the lrgest, and could take them in a straight-up fight - the Germans would still have been thrown back into the sea. Ad-hoc as British anti-invasion plans were - they'd never expected the Germans to perform so well, so had not prepared for the eventuality at all - they were still more than enough to prevent a successful German invasion. They were, to put it bluntly, also pretty damn brutal, involving such wonderful (and illegal) things as mustard gas.

Germany wasn't really capable of amphibious invasions. They got lucky in both Norway and Crete, the only amphibious invasions they launched against opposition. The British withdrew from the Channel Islands rather than try to defend them when they were closer to France than Britain, giving Germany aerial superiority.

In Crete the Germans were being beaten decisively until some New Zealand troops, under the mistaken impression that they were facing a significantly greater number of paratroopers than they actually were, withdrew from a strategic position, giving the Germans control of the local airfield. The Germans then rushed in reinforcements and supplies. They also had local aerial superiority over Crete, which, like the Channel Islands, was closer to German Continental airfields than British ones.

In Norway the Germans were assisted somewhat by the fact that Quisling provided some political and military support - though far, far less than he'd promised - and the fact that the Royal Navy simply wasn't in the area at the time. Even then the Germans suffered heavy losses; I believe they lost the use about a third of their surface fleet during the invasion, though most of it was salvageable. They also benefited from Churchill's poor strategy to counter them; he concentrated on taking Narvik, which he did, when he should have denied the Germans the men and materiel to maintain their grip on the city, forcing their withdrawal. The Germans also never fully captured Norway; its mountainous terrain was perfect for guerrilla activities, which continued until the end of the war.

What these two invasions proved was that the expenditure necessary for the Germans to launch a successful invasion over the sea was far in excess of what was needed to fight them off. And Britain was a much tougher nut to crack than Norway or Crete.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_anti-invasion_preparations_of_World_War_II

All quite right - I'm not arguing Sealion had any chance as things were. Just saying that, under very specific circumstances, there might have been a chance:

- with complete use of the French Fleet
- with air superiority

Neither of which happened.

And the German capacity for amphibous operations was indeed low. I'd argue, however, that the loss of ships (10 destroyers and a heavy cruiser, IIRC, plus some miscellaneous transports and the like) WAS mostly due to the Royal Navy - plus idiotically going against heavy coastal defenses in a narrow fjord in the case of the Blücher, and w/o air superiority for Narvik, as it was out of range for most planes.

Crete showed the world mostly that air assault by parachute and glider against defended sites was not viable - it depends on surprise as agains Eben Emael. This was shown again in Market Garden.

As to the superiority of the Royal Navy - no question about it, except they couldn't keep the whole fleet defending the Channel, could they? They needed to cover the North Atlantic against the U-boats and had commitments all over the world; plus, if Germany had really had air superiority and all its' heavy naval forces concentrated (think Bismarck and Tirpitz etc.) plus the French fleet - well, let's just say it could have been an epic battle! Popcorn, anyone...?

Anyway, no reason to keep arguing - I agree Sealion wasn't really in the cards in the real world!

 

[say1988]

To the first: that's why I said 'erstwhile' ally.

I am sorry, I just read that completely wrong.

 

[r16]

the mother of all mistakes for Adolf Hitler was his belief that Nazism would be allowed a victory over the Reds . Hatred of them was common , Western democracies would love to protect the still vast remnants of the Soviet Union after a German victory ; as that would imply a wholesale slaughter of the Russians , policing of the shares would be easier . This belief in the mutual profit over the carcass of the Communists conspiracy led the world to the war and took millions to grave .

the war Adolf wanted was against the Czechs ; as Russians would be in it , invading Poland if need be , but for the fact that Stalin thought he had erred in having the biggest tank park in the world . Anti tank guns had cut a bloody swath in Spain ; Hemingway speaks rather harshly of a tank unit commander who ended up shot for cowardice . Instead of moral crusade where Hitler would gloss over his rightful correction of an injustice with the spectacle of Red hordes raping Poland , his west secure by the inactive Allies ( since they would be cheering the Nazis on ) , Stalin barked but declined to bite . IF tanks were a flop and cavalry was still the arm of decisive movement , well , the Polish cavalry had a good reputation .

once turning the Czechs against him , Hitler had to remove them , hence the invasion of ' 39 . There were "unjustified" grumblings in America .Since American influence , finance , industry and military power were the aces in the Allied sleeve , needed for the cheap mopping up of a Germany bled white while defeating the monstrous Commies , Poland had to be protected ; unfortunately only in words . It also meant a two front war for Germany , leading to Molotov - Ribbentrop deal . Germans deferred the real war for a couple of years as they had to rearrange the west . Russians bought time to get better tanks and a buffer zone to match the German one . Had the Poles caved in , Germans would have a diplomacy free rail connection to East Prussia to decrease the risk from the Soviet fleet in the real war conducted from the territory of Baltic states . A puppet regime in Warsaw might have fought for a Polish Lebensraum in the Ukraine as a compensation for the loss of their shoreline but they were so sure of German intentions that they would be erased in due course , long before a thunder struck down the Germans , plus Hitler could prove to be a real son of a ... by make a lasting deal with the Commies . So , the reputation of Polish cavalry flared in 38 , when it was an attempt in futility to convince Warsaw to side with Prag ; why , the Poles would be in Berlin in a month . They failed to see the sarcasm in the "Godspeed" answer ; they took it as jealousy .

it gets more ridiculous now . Germans had no plans to knock out England or France out of the war .The intention was to invade the Low countries to get some depth for the Ruhr valley , some air and naval bases for increased effectiveness in the North Sea . As long as primary German industry was kept out of single seater range , the threat of terror bombing would have kept the bomber fleets on the ground , in an early form of MAD theory . Which finally resulted in the 8 out of 10 panzer divisions being detailed for the disruptive "raid" that would have the hapless Allies returning from Dyle , wasting days , doing nothing worthwhile . While lulled by the prospect of bagging the majority of the mechanized power of Germans in a cauldron of their own making .Germans were outnumbered in 1940 , you know . Laughing out loud ? One must be familiar with the Battle of Bulge to assess the defensive strenghts of the Ardennes , a reminder that Germans have a long history of strategic attacks to seize territory useful in tactical defence that attrites the enemy also helps . An armoured Cannae would inspire the Allies so much that they would forget north ; where airborne landings would take out the Dutch potential to fight , clearing a wide front for tactical manouvreing in Belgium , a summer long inspired campaigning would level the front to maybe former WW1 lines in Northern France and a numerically superior Luftwaffe would "threaten" Paris to disable both Armee L'Air and RAF . The campaign of Norway , unplanned from German perspective , took away the suprise of the paratroops and the desant suffered accordingly in Dutch hands . Yet the Allies were far worse in shape than Germans imagined them to be . Numerically much superior at the point of contact , Germans emerged into a vacuum and confusion . They had their good defensive positions but where were the massive counter attack forces of the Allies ? Had they figured it out , giving away a larger area waiting until the number of the German forces in the pocket seemed OK and the terrain deemed right for the thousands of Allied tanks ? Guderian went forward in reconnaisance , in massive numbers , true , to tickle the Allied command to action . That the sicklecut reached Abbeville without much of a scratch was a shocking surprise to Germans...

which kinda explains the miracle of Dunkirk . The superiority of German arms in 1940 is quite a myth ; it was the unpenetrable Skoda supported by the unstoppable Stuka that the Allies had trouble with and the time to waste complaining . The much increased effectiveness of French and Belgian units around Dunkirk is not because they were given a chance to survive , in the horrible "Blighty" . Rather it was something normal . Properly supported troops that can't be flanked by the Panzers discover the German tanks are no more than tiny,rifle proof boxes , just their own ; Bosche is good but not superman , just like his father was not in the Great War . The feeble two pounder , much derided in all those apologies for the tearful story of the British vs Rommel in the desert , was deadly against early panzers within range and reducing the pocket would have meant Germans getting within range . Leaving it to Luftwaffe to harass the evacuation , rather poorly one might well argue despite the poor weather , makes Dunquerke a solid German victory , if you can forget the Anglosaxon self glorification and consider the evacuation of 300 000 plus troops allowed Germans a free hand to quickly improvise a plan to take out some millions of French soldiers out of the war . Being an armchair strategist , ı tend to feel RN might have supported the pocket while taking excess capacity out until the Allied Command stabilized the front and American imports made a mark . That weird French belief in the perfidious Albion reached a peak in those years . Apparently .

the bluff of unhinging the Allies had turned into one of a reality ; Germans quickly came up with a decisive stroke to make Maginot line the joke of the century . The fighting was initially tougher than Norway or Yugoslavia , two other candidates for rapidly prepared brilliantly conducted offensives ; although nobody reads much on Plan Red , it has been described as the high water mark for German generalship . A bold statement as Balkans 41 compares well with Middle East 91.

what followed is something to ponder for the Nazi bashing atheist . The finest weather in a century forced effective use of Luftwaffe against British Isles . The fall of France while unexpected had given much prestige to Germany , yet a Britain still fighting took some of the shine . Battle of Britain was a prop for London to come to its senses , an exit for honourable peace while Hitler would go doing what he was meant for , the real war in the east ... Many , especially those Hurri and Spit pilots didn't share that vision . The attrition they conducted , combined with already tottering war production that had been emasculated by Nazis for political control , meant the real war started with aproximately same number of German planes and panzers in September 1, 39 and June 22 , 1941 . And Soviet Union was somewhat bigger and somewhat stronger than Poland . It didn't look too difficult for the Führer , rains and necessary drying of land had been delayed , and the date was desirable , as the greatest commander of all time , he would succeed where Napoleon had failed .

he believed in himself . The worst mistake German generals did was failing to shoot him in Autumn 1940 . Which convinces me easily to disregard all those memories that said they had actually planned all that

 

[MrDogbert]

I think hitlers worst mistake was the delaying of Operation Barbarossa.

 

[ParkCungHee]

It's a good thing for him Barbarossa wasn't delayed then.

 

[LightSpectra]

It's actually a bit of a myth that it was the coldness that devastated the Germans. The temperature made their engines hard to operate, and it also finished off any squads unfortunate enough to be cut off from supplies, but that wasn't the critical part. It was moreso disease and mud, of which the same was true for the French invasion of Russia.

Loosely speaking, the coldness aided the Germans a little bit. The purpose of Barbarossa was to knock out the Soviet Union's economy in an epic blitz, which would've failed even if the invasion weren't allegedly delayed. So, the fact that the frost stopped the Germans in their tracks at the outskirts of Moscow didn't prevent Moscow from falling; what it actually prevented was German tanks from being trapped inside the city.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Actually, the cold set in after the Russian counteroffensive began, so if anything, it prevented the Germans from being pushed back further.

 

[Glassfan]

Loosely speaking, the coldness aided the Germans a little bit. The purpose of Barbarossa was to knock out the Soviet Union's economy in an epic blitz, which would've failed even if the invasion weren't allegedly delayed.

It's interesting to note that the German Generals were looking for military success and it was Hitler who wanted to destroy the Soviet economy and to sieze economic objectives. They were working at cross-purposes.

But don't you think "General Winter" was on the side of the Siberian divisions in the counter-offensive?

 

[Yeekim]

It was moreso disease and mud, of which the same was true for the French invasion of Russia.

I've also heard that the another great nuisance were mice disabling electrical systems of tanks by gnawing through wires...
Don't know much about tanks of the era, so can't say how trustworthy that is.

 

[Masada]

I'm fairly sure Beevor mentions that in Stalingrad. If he doesn't, then I've heard it somewhere else.

 

[LightSpectra]

That seems odd to me. How much of the German tanks were electrified at that time?

 

[Masada]

All of them or, at least, most of them. I don't think they had to be cranked to turn-over.

 

[xchen08]

There's also the turret traverse on most Panzer IVs and some Panthers.