Could UK defeat Germany without help from the United States?

Could UK alone defeat Germany in WW2?

  • Total voters
    2
S

SAINT

Active member
:?: I wonder if Great Britain alone could defeat Germany without help from the United States during WW2? any analysis please?
 
I say yes to an extent. France got overrun, but Great Britain's Air Force was kicking 's ass. The US simply gave them the supplies to do it. Then there was DDay...
 
I'd say yes but they would still have to buy weapons from the USA and the Russians would overrun most of Europe. If it werent for the Americans Churchill would probably invade the Balkans.

THE WAR WOULD BE MUUUCH LONGER THAN HISTORICALY

Uless the Germans managed to produce a superweapon of their own :firedevi: :firedevi: :firedevi:
 
I would say yes but only if germany had managed to beat the russians! The german defeat in russia lost them a lot of men and equipment and they got another enemy pushing down on them, but if the russians had lost then the german would be free to use the whole luftwaffe against britain and they would have the time to build an invasion fleet and with the majority of europe under there control they would of had the resources to evenually beat the british as they would of (like they almost did) isolate britain through the use of U-boats!
 
I agree with Uncle_Sam. Furthermore, to think that the United Kingdom could have defeated Germany alone is not only a highly improbable hypothesis, but also one that is ridiculous. Without American intervention or assistance, Nazis flags might be decorating the city of London today. If you think about this question, the United Kingdom did fight the German alone [at least initially] and with very little success. To illustrate this fact, let’s just examine the state of affairs before America entered the conflict. And if we do this, we will have our answer – “NO WAY!” Let’s visit the summer of 1940. At that time, Hitler dominated Europe from the North Cape to the Pyrenees. His one remaining active enemy—Britain, under a new prime minister, Winston Churchill—vowed to continue fighting. The British army had left most of its weapons on the beaches at Dunker. Stalin was in no mood to challenge Hitler. The U.S., shocked by the fall of France, began the first peacetime conscription in its history and greatly increased its military budget, but public opinion, although sympathetic to Britain, was against getting into the war. The Germans hoped to subdue the British by starving them out. In June 1940 they undertook the Battle of the Atlantic, using submarine warfare to cut the British overseas lifelines. The Germans now had submarine bases in Norway and France. At the outset the Germans had only 28 submarines, but more were being built—enough to keep Britain in danger until the American entered the war to carry on the battle for months thereafter. Invasion was the expeditious way to finish off Britain, but that meant crossing the English Channel; Hitler would not risk it unless the British air force could be neutralized first. As a result, the Battle of Britain was fought in the air, not on the beaches. In August 1940 the Germans launched daylight raids against ports and airfields and in September against inland cities. The objective was to draw out the British fighters and destroy them. The Germans failed to reckon with a new device, radar, which greatly increased the British fighters' effectiveness. Because their own losses were too high the Germans had to switch to night bombing at the end of September. Between then and May 1941 they made 71 major raids on London and 56 on other cities, but the damage they wrought was too indiscriminate to be militarily decisive. On September 17, 1940, Hitler postponed the invasion indefinitely since the British were really in no position to invade Germany, thereby conceding defeat in the Battle of Britain. However, conceding defeat in this manner certainly did not make the British victorious. In short Great Britain declared war on Germany following the latter's invasion of Poland in 1939. After withdrawing her expeditionary force from France in June 1940, she continued the war on other fronts, chiefly by the long-drawn-out Battle of the Atlantic against the German submarine menace and the seesaw battles against the German Afrika Corps in the Western Desert of North Africa making little significant strategic inroads. It was not until the joint Anglo-American invasions of Italy and the final D-Day invasion of Nazi-held Europe that the Third Reich started to crumble.
 
Good read dh76513, but, The Battle of Stalingrad and the entire Eastern Front had nothing to do with the reich crumbling? By the time D-Day came around the Germans were already beaten, we just dusted them off :D

We'll never really know what would have happened, but, being British, I believe we WOULD have fought fantacially for every inch of land, but yes, it would have took years for us to invade Germany.

Let us not forget that The Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians and South Africans were already in the War at the time.

Heres a question: in 1945, could the U.S.A have beat the U.S.S.R?
 
Paddster, Thank you for your kind words. Correct, but without the large number of American planes, trucks, and tanks sent to the Soviet Union would there have even been a Stalingrad? Then again without the large number of Russian military losses (I think about 9 million and more than all the other countries added together) would there even be a United States or Great Britain? These are all important factors to consider and you are correct in your conclusion that no one could possibly ever know the outcome to such a really. On that note, I would also like to add that I do not think United States could have done this alone either. While a Nazis invasion of the United States would have been unlikely for many years to come, we too would have fought like hell for every inch of land. And in addition to the allies you noted, let’s not forget all the other many countries that committed their warriors, resources, and efforts to stop Fascism. The bottom line is that the reality of this situation and the positive outcome in defeating Fascism required a collective world effort.
 
I think if the US had not become involved in the war in europe then britain would of had to rely far more on the colonies at the time to provide supplies, countries such as south africa and canada werent touched by the germans and if the there was no hope of the US joining the war then britain would of looked to these places, But not australia as they had the japanese to deal with!
 
In my humble opinion England could not have done it on it's own prior to our entering the war they were getting there butts kicked all over Europe. They needed our manpower and our weapons not to mention our leadership. :m1:
 
Britain did have good leadersip in WW2, generals such as montgomery (the only non-american ever to command amrican troops), the reason we got your leadership is because your constitution does not allow american troops to be under overall command of a foreign general, hence why most of the NATo generals have been american!
 
I agree on that their RAF was MUCH better than the German Air Force.. But remember, you can't win a whole war ONLY using planes.

I think UK would get their asses kicked down on the battlefield, not 'cause of the weapons or tactics or anything, but Germany would outnumber the UK soldiers, remember that the Germans forced the invaded countries to recruit to the German Army.
 
Never.

In fact the poll should really read:

Could the UK and the USA have defeated Germany without help from the Soviet Union?
 
See that's a tough one, because we're moving in the other direction (on the globe) I don't think that the Alliede Forces had any contact to the Soviet, remember that the Russians were very protective about their country.

I think that the Alliede Forces would have after a long while have beaten the German forces, but it would take VERY long time. And that is if the Germans didn't walk to Russia.

I'm not 100% sure on anything in this scenario, all I know is, I'm glad the Soviet were where the were.. :D
 
David Hurlbert,

I suggest you dont get your history from Hollywood.

The Germans were defeated by D-Day, when the US landed?

Rite...

1 - There would have been no D-Day with out Britain.
2 - Er... Russia?
3- You rate the heavy losses in military material in North Africa minor? 500 Ju-52s lost in three weeks is minor?
4 - Why no mention of the American defeat at Kasserine Pass when the US first met the Germans?

Stalingrad, Kursk, El Alamein, Moscow.... Not many Yanks at these 'Turning Point ' battles...

You also fail to mention the effects of Operation Bagration on the German Army.

Perhaps you would like to tell me how the US performed in the battle for Normandy and in the ETO? How about their divisional turnovers or their combat effectiveness?

Why do the US have to make out that they singlehandedly beat Germany, when the British and Russians know different...
 
Theredbaron

.....and I suggest that you read the post very carefully before making character conclusions and/or generalizations like how U.S. citizens “have to make out that they single handedly beat Germany, when the British and Russians know different.....” In fact, you and I are very much in agreement as I wrote in my previous post:

".....without the large number of Russian military losses (I think about 9 million and more than all the other countries added together) would there even be a United States or Great Britain? These are all important factors to consider and you are correct in your conclusion that no one could possibly ever know the outcome to such a really. On that note, I would also like to add that I do not think United States could have done this alone either. While a Nazis invasion of the United States would have been unlikely for many years to come, we too would have fought like hell for every inch of land. And in addition to the allies you noted, let’s not forget all the other many countries that committed their warriors, resources, and efforts to stop Fascism. The bottom line is that the reality of this situation and the positive outcome in defeating Fascism required a collective world effort."
 
My apologies Sir!

It is late and I may well have misread your post or read another and missed the name.

Sorry.

Russian losses are estimated at 26 million for WW2.
 
theredbaron

Apology fully accepted. And with that being said I would like to add I am impressed that you apologized since this is certainly not a trend in many people in this day and age and I honor this trait in anyone. Furthermore, I would like to say that I admire your passion and wish more persons had that spark for duty, honor, and country in them. I salute you!

As for the Russian losses - those numbers that I indicated were for "military losses" - your numbers I believe are total (civilian and military).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top