Perfidious Albion encourages Sealion

I understand the logic that means most posters here say Sealion is as likely to be successful as an invasion using balloon launched teddy bears.

Suppose the Imperial General Staff come to the same conclusion, after all the British were already reading some of Hitlers Mail thanks to ULTRA and a lucky decrypt could give German plans and preconditions for invasion, alternatively one of the many Anglophiles in the German Abwher could pass the vital information. Hey suppose Stalin tells Philby & co to encourage the idea thinking it will Weaken Germany.

Anyway during Dunkirk some brightspark gets the ear of WC and he loves the idea. All the German Spies in Britain are working for thje XX commitee.

Churchill always said he planned to use the slogan "you can always take one with you" and hit the beaches with gas in the first 12 hours of a landing. So I think he would like the idea of breaking the sledgehammer of God on the white cliffs.

Question 1.
Could the Brits fake helplessness well enough to persuade the Gernans to try it for real?

Question 2.
Just how bad would it be for the poor invaders?

Question 3.
Would it help or hurt US/UK relations?

I think sending the RN away from the Channel and telling the RAF to go easy of air superiority could be enough to allow to lure the Germans into a successful Sealion attempt.

But realistically, that means Britain has to accept enormous damage (for example, if it wants to convince the Germans that the RAF has been mortally wounded, then it has to let the Luftwaffe fly many missions unopposed, which means damage to radars, airbases, war industry, etc. Similarly, a realistic number of RN ships must be "sacrificed" or based far away, or else the OKW will know that the Royal Navy is hidden somewhere - and then will wonder why, and then will probably review its plans.

It would totally help US/UK ties. America would feel pressured to do more to save what's left of the Allies.

In the grand scheme of things a good defeat of Sealion would only destroy a handful of the hundred or so German divisions, at a terrible risk that would never outwiegh the strategic benefit. It does have a sneaky charm though, which I like. Perhaps someone can work out a scheme where it does happen.

The problem is, as people have stated before, if the Germans had the means to pull off Sea Lion i.e Control of the skies of at least Southern Britain and control of the seas at least around the channel, then they may as well just starve Britain into submission. This would be an incredibly risky plan that involves giving the Germans a large advantage and hoping they'll go for a plan that none of the 3 branches was enthusiastic about.

Thus it's probably not worth it but would be great if it did work.

Riain said:

In the grand scheme of things a good defeat of Sealion would only destroy a handful of the hundred or so German divisions, at a terrible risk that would never outwiegh the strategic benefit. It does have a sneaky charm though, which I like. Perhaps someone can work out a scheme where it does happen.

Click to expand...

Yes but what about the morale effect? Surely a failed Sealion would take a lot of the shine off Hitler's reputation. All those German memoirs saying they were just waiting for the right moment to overthrow The Boss, are they all invention?

I think the nutrality act is out of the window and the USA is going to do all (short of war) that it can to help the poor , brave Brits.

Add the losses inflicted on the Luftwaffe and the german navy I suspect the cost would be highjer than you imply.

The Red said:

The problem is, as people have stated before, if the Germans had the means to pull off Sea Lion i.e Control of the skies of at least Southern Britain and control of the seas at least around the channel, then they may as well just starve Britain into submission. This would be an incredibly risky plan that involves giving the Germans a large advantage and hoping they'll go for a plan that none of the 3 branches was enthusiastic about.

Thus it's probably not worth it but would be great if it did work.

Click to expand...

I have an idea. Send a secret message to Hitler that you have enough political support to sign an armastice and force out Churchill but you need German Boots on British soil before you move. It is suprising how poor german intelligence on Brtain was so this could be plausible.
This means Hitler thinks he is going to get what he wanted and plays towards his prejudices. If HE says YOU WILL LAND then the armed forces will cobble something together. It will be a complete mess but he has too much presitige at this point to be opposed.

One question who do you get to sign the letter?

cerebus said:

I have an idea. Send a secret message to Hitler that you have enough political support to sign an armastice and force out Churchill but you need German Boots on British soil before you move. It is suprising how poor german intelligence on Brtain was so this could be plausible.
This means Hitler thinks he is going to get what he wanted and plays towards his prejudices. If HE says YOU WILL LAND then the armed forces will cobble something together. It will be a complete mess but he has too much presitige at this point to be opposed.

One question who do you get to sign the letter?

Click to expand...

German intelligence was bad, but they weren't morons. Hitler will not order what is at best a very risky operation based on assurances from a British politician, that would be similar to Churchill invading France in 1941 because Hess tells him that British troops landing in France will bring down Hitler.

You would need large scale cooperation with the United States who at the time were still very neutral so it's doubtful they would help, especially when it risks losing Britain to the Germans. Have a famous Anglophobe like Kennedy hold secret discussion with the Spanish ambassador about how America is fearful of Britain continuing the war due to fears that they'll be dragged in eventually thus they are putting pressure on Churchill to accept Hitler's peace offering. At the same time his cabinet and parliament at large are tiring of the war and would be willing to negotiate. This is done by "secret" meetings between the British and German secret services and ambassadors in Switzerland. They argue that it's Churchill's promise that a German invasion is impossible that is keeping him in control, if this can be proven wrong then Churchill will be toppled and peace can be made. Hitler of course, is forced to give assurances that he will preserve British independence in exchange for a free hand in Europe and the hand over of a few bases and possessions here and there, Thus he gets ready to invade and topple Churchill.

Maybe something like that?

cerebus said:

Question 1.
Could the Brits fake helplessness well enough to persuade the Gernans to try it for real?

Question 2.
Just how bad would it be for the poor invaders?

Question 3.
Would it help or hurt US/UK relations?

Click to expand...

Yes! Pull back No.11 Group back to bases north of London and do not put up much of a fight for anything south of London until the invasion. But as The Red said, it´s very risky. I don´t think the LW coud have hurt the UK badly but Chain Home in Kent would have been lost. No big problem as long as the Me109 does not have the drop tanks.

Very bad! Not so much materially but psychiologically. Right after a huge victory comes a shattering defeat. That would not have been good for Adolf´s reputation.

Help. The Brits would win.

What about domestic politics in Britain? Churchill can't viably pull off the defiant stance he took in OTL if he's abandoning the skies over southern England, letting Kent and such get bombed. There's suddenly a legitimate argument to be made that Churchill is needlessly prolonging the war, needlessly letting English lives be lost to prove a point. You don't want to actually have Britain consider peace while pretending it does, do you?

To answer the questions -
1) Not without risking it becoming real political helplessness and weakness...
2) Dunno - depends on how willing the English are to fight when their leadership seems uninterested in actually fighting
3) Hurt, maybe?

cerebus said:

I understand the logic that means most posters here say Sealion is as likely to be successful as an invasion using balloon launched teddy bears.

Click to expand...

Darn! Another brilliant Plan has been foiled!
Recall the Zeppelins, Hauptamann Schmidt! And find someone willing to buy all those teddy bears!

cerebus said:

Question 1.
Could the Brits fake helplessness well enough to persuade the Gernans to try it for real?
Question 2.
Just how bad would it be for the poor invaders?
Question 3.
Would it help or hurt US/UK relations?

Click to expand...

I'd say internal pressure would make it an impossible scheme.
Especially if Churchill is at the helm.
The internal front has already been mobilized for labour, extra gardening and save-the-cans, and a good share of the mobilization is focused on the issue that the Wicked Enemy is Big and Powerful, so Everyone Must Do His Duty to beat it.
Leaving an almost defensless shore after this concept had been drilled in the public opinion's mind would cause waves of histeria and people shouting for a new, mentally stable PM.

Even if the government explains to people that this is merely a ruse (using a welsh accent so that the information cannot be intercepted by german spies), people would raise hell anyway, since Gallipoli showed them how good Wiston is at drawing battle plans

cerebus said:

Yes but what about the morale effect? Surely a failed Sealion would take a lot of the shine off Hitler's reputation. All those German memoirs saying they were just waiting for the right moment to overthrow The Boss, are they all invention?

I think the nutrality act is out of the window and the USA is going to do all (short of war) that it can to help the poor , brave Brits.

Add the losses inflicted on the Luftwaffe and the german navy I suspect the cost would be highjer than you imply.

Click to expand...

By both the timing and success of OTL Valkyrie and other plots, yeah they’re lying through their teeth..Well pen, a lot of German generals did post war mostly to either trash their colleagues or blame their own fuck ups on Hitler.

As for this deception plan, well in our OTL war effort Britain was skilful at deception operations and espionage. But given that the Germans could only transport light infantry, without much in the way of supporting tanks & artillery in the first wave. if initial resistance isn’t particularly strong they’ll quickly catch onto the idea that something is wrong. After all they'd expect the landing to be fought tooth and nail.

Guys

Cerebus's idea is very attractive. Provided it didn't prompt Hitler to cancel Barbarossa or the Nazis to decide on the change of leadership then a successful triggering of an invasion would be very useful. The German army might not suffer heavy losses compared to their total force-pool but could suffer some fairly difficult to replace losses, while their air force, navy and economy are all likely to take crippling hits. Also it should have a big effect on moral in both nations and probably also the view of the US. They would be worried by the fact the Germans got across the channel but encouraged by the clear determination and strength of British resistance.

However it seems like it would be difficult to arrange and would mean reducing significantly the defence of the south of the country for a while before the invasion. That will do damage to material and moral. While if the truth comes out at any point that this was deliberate, even if it is several years later and the battle has significantly boosted Britain's position then the effect would be dynamite. Anybody involved would have to say goodbye to their career at the very least.

The only possibility might be a very small, well-positioned group deciding on such an action, with several members later resigning in response to the gross incompetence they have displayed to enable the RAF especially to be so badly mis-managed. Even then it would still be very difficult to keep the secret and even if it only emerged after a victorious war would result in a lot of anger and lasting bad feeling, both in Britain and overseas.

The other problem is that while we, with all the additional information we have, can see that a Sealion attempt by Germany is almost certain to end in disaster for them that was by no means certain in hindsight. It would be grossly irresponsible for any leader to take such a gamble with all the uncertainties at the time.

Steve

Steve
I fear you are right
I love the idea and it does seem the sort of thing Churchill would go for but all the proffessional military men would come down on the idea like a tonne of bricks. I have thought about it but I can't twist the personalities involved enoughb to make it work.

As for the idea of the British intelligence community of the time trusting the Americans in a deception plan!

No I fear this is a time line that will not cast.

Any ruse of this sort would be highly dangerous, as if it is seen that Britain is losing the defensive battle and a successful German invasion is possible it would encourage the politicians who are unsure of the wisdom of continuing a war they can see no hope of Britain winning to try and overthrow Churchill, either by legal or illegal means..