Nazi occupation of Britain

NIK PARMEN

Banned
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK9UQ-otjzI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_at_War

a British television series first broadcast on ITV on July 11, 2004 tells the story of the German Occupation of the Channel Islands, and primarily focuses on three local families: the upper-class Dorrs, the middle-class Mahys and the working-class Jonases, and four German officers. The fictional island of St. Gregory serves as a stand-in for the real-life islands Jersey and Guernsey, and the story is compiled from the events on both islands. What the effects would be like if sealion was a success to the people of Britain? More like of those in the Channel Islands or much worse?
 
The Nazis appear to have been planning, ideologically speaking, on a French or Scandinavian style occupation, not ubiquitous murder as in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union.

The island would have been covered in military bases, and the Germans would have imposed their own laws and a harsh regime (the man nominated to be chief of German security was later nominated for Moscow: no kid gloves, evidently). All British Jews would of course have been exterminated by the SS. There's a "Black Book" listing about 2000 people (politicians, anti-fascists, anti-appeasers, intellectuals, government-in-exile members, German exiles, and Noel Coward) who were to be detained immediately and almost certainly killed.

We'd probably have seen the imposition of rationing and harsh military control. Any collaboration government would have been a front of Quislings for the military authorities, I should think: the Nazis has no reason to trust any of us.

I'd imagine we'd certainly be able to mobilise a resistance, although an eastern-style partisan army is probably out of the question. For one thing, the Nazis will have a job of it even making their presence felt in Rosshire of North Wales for some time. We have both rugged areas and large cities, and some infrastructure in place (the Home Guard: this may have been why the nazis wanted to shut everything even vaguely militaristic down, including the Boy Scouts).

I'd certainly say harsher that then Channel Islands. They had so few people and so many Germans that there was no possibility of effective resistance. On Britain, we'd see plenty pf punitive executions and of course the killing of large groups in our society.

There were certain despicable elements in Celtic nationalist circles who looked admiringly at the Nazis, but even over on Ireland this was largely a joke: the authorities, IIRC, very wisely allowed Welsh Nazi sympathisers to air there views, completely discrediting them. But the Nazis might try establishing some mechanisms to split us: I trust that will work about as well as the "Goralenvolk".
 
They planned to reinstate Edward VIII as a puppet since they suspected he was pro-fascist, and I think might have tried to put Moseley as a puppet PM, dunno about that though.

On the whole, expect something like France, only harsher as revenge for standing up longer. No mass murder of innocents though.
 
Expect a Collaborationist government lead by David Lloyd George.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lloyd_George
No, don't.

It really annoys me that Lloyd-George is portrayed as some sort of collaborator or Nazi sympathiser. That is simply not the case at alll. The man was a liberal and an old man who showed interest in the new Nazi regime, something not uncommon in europe during the thirties.

There is no evidence whatsoever that he would lead a collaborationist government, and it denegrates his reputation.
 

Cook

Banned
There is no evidence whatsoever that he would lead a collaborationist government, and it denegrates his reputation.

You mean apart from his expressions of respect for the Nazi Regime?
Or his advocating a negotiated peace in September of 1940, after the Battle of Britain?
 
You mean apart from his expressions of respect for the Nazi Regime?
Or his advocating a negotiated peace in September of 1940, after the Battle of Britain?
People can read normal font size you know.

I have a question for you. In September 1940, without the benefit of hindsight, how could Britain, at this point in Europe on her own win the Second World War? Yes, the threat of invasion had gone, but how could she win? If anything, if Britain was going to negotiate, this would seem the ideal time, as neither side could realistically win at this point in this scenario. To state he wanted a negotiated peace at this point hardly makes the man a traitor or a Nazi.

Also, many in Britain showed an interest in Fascism and Nazism in the thirties. Showing an interest and having respect for something (before the full horrors became clear) does not make you that thing. Neville Chamberlain and Stanley Baldwin thought they could do business with Hitler, and indeed did deals with Hitler. Does this make them pro-Nazi stooges?

Leaving aside all of that, his own daughter, Megan Lloyd-George was on the Nazi death list for British leaders they wanted to bump off upon invasion. Do you seriously think that this as a given, he would work with the murderers of his own daughter? Also, had he been a Hitlerite stooge, do you think he might have fallen out with his daughter?

This whole topic annoys me.
 
Expect a Collaborationist government lead by David Lloyd George.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lloyd_George

Absolutely agree with my fellow Scotsman here: there are so many ways this is wrong. As to taking Nazism seriously, let's check out what Churchill said on the subject in 1938, when he was already anti-appeaser #1:

"I have always said that if Great Britain were defeated in war I hoped we should find a Hitler to lead us back to our rightful position among the nations."

(He goes on to say that Hitler is squandering his achievement by his warmongering, but that Hitler had an achievement was seldom disputed at the time.)

The negotiated peace thing? You know another couple of people who contemplated negotiated peaces? Hitler and Stalin. The traitors!

And do you think that far-right sentiment (and LG wasn't even "far-right" at all) makes you an automatic traitor? In France, there was this poisonous "better Hitler than our own Reds" sentiment; in Yugoslavia, the Ustasha and Chetniks of the population would rather kill their compatriots than attract retribution than fighting the Nazi occupier. But the Czech and Polish fascists never collaborated; and IIRC, Oswald Mosley said the war was a mistake but he hoped we won. And speaking of Yugoslavia, the Italians revived the Principality of Montenegro, and the pretending Prince, to his great credit, told them to stuff themselves.

So in conclusion, Lloyd-George had expressed the hardly uncommon sentiments that "Nazis aren't all bad" and "We're in a bit of a sticky", but never gave any hint of being a traitor. Do you really think a succesful war leader with his daughter shot would want to work for her murderers?

If the Nazis found Quislings, they would be, as Quisling was, an utter facade.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
...

On the whole, expect something like France, only harsher as revenge for standing up longer. No mass murder of innocents though.


You mean outside of all the country's Jews, communists, Gypsies, homosexuals, and random hostages following any act of resistance?

The above being the Nazi version of enlightened occupation.
 
There were certain despicable elements in Celtic nationalist circles who looked admiringly at the Nazis, but even over on Ireland this was largely a joke: the authorities, IIRC, very wisely allowed Welsh Nazi sympathisers to air there views, completely discrediting them. But the Nazis might try establishing some mechanisms to split us: I trust that will work about as well as the "Goralenvolk".

Eh, I don't think the Scots and Welsh would really play divide and rule. I'm reminded of a joke my Grandfather ostensibly told at Dunkirk. "Ya know, if the English give up too we're gonna be in for a long war." The Union's too strong, and the Nazis too willing to shoot protestors.
 
Eh, I don't think the Scots and Welsh would really play divide and rule. I'm reminded of a joke my Grandfather ostensibly told at Dunkirk. "Ya know, if the English give up too we're gonna be in for a long war." The Union's too strong, and the Nazis too willing to shoot protestors.

That's what I'm saying: the "Goralenvolk" idea fooled sbsolutely no-one.
 
Top