tmanthegreat wrote:To set a few things straight...
As for the Battle of Britain, the British were within days of running out of planes and pilots by the time the battle "officially" ended in late October 1940, despite their valliant efforts. The Germans at that time had and maintained numerical superiority as well as overall superior pilot training. What saved the British was the decision by the German high command to switch to bombing London and other civilian targets at night in October of 1940 (in reprisal for RAF bombing raids on Berlin). This spared the RAF bases and factories in England's midlands from the attacks they had been sustaining previously and thus saved England's war-effort.
However, the question of who won World War II and why actually comes down to the ability to supply one's army. The Americans (and the Russians) had vast amounts of resources and industrial potential that they could bring to bear in fighting the war, which the Germans did not. So what ultimately counted in battle was numerical strength, not necessairly ability.
There are plenty of studies and books written over the years which show clear evidence that the
average German unit was better trained, had more competent leadership at the junior level and had generally better equipment than the
average American unit, let alone the Russians. The average US and British units going up against similar strength German units seldom prevailed, with the exception of the elite paratrooper divisions like the 101st, 82nd or British 6th. This is part of the reason why it took the allied forces so long to break out of the Normandy bocage country between June and August 1944 - and they were partly up against only 2nd rate German troops!
In a fight, however, it came down to the fact that the Americans and Russians could throw many more men, tanks, and planes into a battle than could the Germans. They also had better intelligence. The bulk of WWII thus was essentially the wearing-down of the German war machine, which once weakened and cut off (as it was by the summer of 1944) topled.
*** *** ***
One of the best analyses of the Battle of Britain can be found in the classic book,
The Battle of Britain by Richard Hough and Denis Richards. The appendicies (which even include a day-by-day account of the battle) are particularly helpful for understanding the technicalities of this conflict.
For a comparative study on the abilities of US and German units in WWII (particularly in the Normandy campaign),
Overlord by Max Hastings is an excellent read
Now, what was the topic of this thread
Actually....
You missed my point entirely. When the Allies was reeling back early in the war, they didn't have vast amounts of resources to fall back on. And yet Germany failed to deliver the knock out blow time and time again.
Where was Britain's vast amount of supplies and numerical superiority during the Battle of Britain? Where was Russia's vast amount of supplies as they were being pushed back during the summer-fall of 1941? The factories that ultimately produced the war material they needed was still being rail-roaded to the Urals.
There were no endless hordes of T-34s back then. Like the British, they stopped the Germans with nothing but skill, sheer guts, and bravery.
There were no endless supplies of Spitfires in 1940. There were no limitless supplies of RAF pilots. Yet, they stopped the Germans cold. Why couldn't Germany defeat them? It's certainly not because they are hordes and hordes of Spitfires to shoot down German bombers, or hordes and hordes of T-34s to stop the Panzer's advance.
And it doesn’t really matter if the Germans switched from bombing airfields to bombing cities. They still outnumbered the RAF, but the RAF held their ground, and achieved a 2-1 kill ratio against them. If what you say is true that the Allies only won because they have more stuff.....then shouldn’t the Germans have won early in the war? Plus, they’re far more superior, right?
It's kinda insulting to the memory of the Allied soldiers who faced down and stopped Germany cold to say that they only won because they have more stuff.
If the Germans are so better trained and better equipped.....then why couldn't they brush aside a few American divisions that were either inexperienced, or was resting and refitting with hardly any supplies, in the Ardennes in 1944?
I love the story of how the mighty Kampfgruppe Piper’s advance, armed with the mighty Kingtiger tanks, was frustrated and slowed down immensely by a handful of inexperienced American combat engineers.
And as for the Allies facing 2nd-rate German troops during the Bocage fighting....er...
The 21st Panzer Division, the 1st SS Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler, the 2nd SS Division Das Reich, the 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend, the 9th SS Panzer Division Hohenstaufen, the 10th SS Panzer Division Frundsberg, the 101st (501st) SS S.Pz.Abt, the 102nd SS S.Pz.Abt., the S.Pz.Abt 503, are 2nd-rate German units to you?
I'm sure I missed other veteran German units that fought during the Normandy/France campaigns, but those are all I could remember right now.
It’s just sad to see that it’s the German soldiers and Germany’s war effort that is celebrated and admired now by modelers, military enthusiasts, and amateur historians.
The Germans were good, but not THAT good. If they were, let’s see....
Their superior pilots would have shot down and decimated the Royal Air Force as planned, invade England, and end the last vestige of resistance in the West.
Then they could have turned their full attention to the East. If the German panzers and heer are so superior, they would have easily brushed aside Soviet resistance, all the way to Moscow, and maybe end the war then.
All of this could have happened when America wasn’t even in the war. But no, it didn’t happen that way.
They suffered heavily through the Battle of Britain, because the RAF pilots, with their Spitfires and Hurricanes are equal, and sometimes better than their German pilots and BF-109 counterparts. They are a hell of a lot better than the “destroyer” ME-110s, that was supposed to protect their bombers.
So no, Germany wasn’t superior then.
And after initial stunning success over the surprised and unprepared Soviet army, the Germans was slowed down enough by the ferocity of the Soviet defenses that they didn’t achieve their goals by winter of 1941.
Goering was a good ace pilot in WW1 but a leader in modern warfare(air)HMMMM. Hitler was a corporal runner in WW1. He was a dumb ass . He hated Jews and thought the Arians were the master race and should rule the world. The world thought differently and took care of business. 
