Operation Sealion fails

But it's just as likely to lead to the opposite effect as those who assumed Britain was finished regardless see the German war machine isn't all conquering.

I don't agree mate

Actions like the destruction of the French fleet and supporting the Greeks* as much as possible for example - were received 'positively' in the US as they proved to the US GOV that the UK was serious about this whole standing up to the Nazi's thing - and so beating the snot out of a German invasion would be positively received - after all no point sending loads of military equipment to the Brits if they are only going to throw in the towel and this equipment might eventually end up opposing US Forces somewhere in the future!


Both of these events would have nothing to do with popular opinion and how Lend-Lease was sold to the public in late 1940 and early 1941. Lend-Lease was sold as 'Britain is small, weak, and brave. they desperately need American Help, because Britain is America's front porch. If they go down, we're next!' and 'We'll let the neighbor borrow a hose to put out a fire'

If Britain repulsed an invasion in 1940, the response back to that would be 'What do you mean "they need our help?" They kicked Hitler's tail all by themselves, No need to give them stuff!' Without the popular support, it won't pass. If Lend Lease falls to pass, it won't be there for stuff to start getting funneled to Russia when that war starts a few months later, and Britain will start havinmg trouble paying for its orders from US factories
 
Both of these events would have nothing to do with popular opinion and how Lend-Lease was sold to the public in late 1940 and early 1941. Lend-Lease was sold as 'Britain is small, weak, and brave. they desperately need American Help, because Britain is America's front porch. If they go down, we're next!' and 'We'll let the neighbor borrow a hose to put out a fire'

If Britain repulsed an invasion in 1940, the response back to that would be 'What do you mean "they need our help?" They kicked Hitler's tail all by themselves, No need to give them stuff!' Without the popular support, it won't pass. If Lend Lease falls to pass, it won't be there for stuff to start getting funneled to Russia when that war starts a few months later, and Britain will start havinmg trouble paying for its orders from US factories

Nah - Americans love a winner
 
Both of these events would have nothing to do with popular opinion and how Lend-Lease was sold to the public in late 1940 and early 1941. Lend-Lease was sold as 'Britain is small, weak, and brave. they desperately need American Help, because Britain is America's front porch. If they go down, we're next!' and 'We'll let the neighbor borrow a hose to put out a fire'

If Britain repulsed an invasion in 1940, the response back to that would be 'What do you mean "they need our help?" They kicked Hitler's tail all by themselves, No need to give them stuff!' Without the popular support, it won't pass. If Lend Lease falls to pass, it won't be there for stuff to start getting funneled to Russia when that war starts a few months later, and Britain will start havinmg trouble paying for its orders from US factories

I disagree, a key component of the arguments of some of the more vocal isolationists such as Joe Kennedy and Charles Lindbergh was that Germany was too powerful and the US needed to stay the hell out of the war. Britain defeating an invasion will galvanize pro-Allied sentiment in the US and undercut people like Kennedy and Lindbergh.
 
On lend-lease, we need to pay attention to the diplomatic history. Kennedy was feeding Roosevelt a steady stream of political analysis that Britain was doomed. Assuming the failure of Sea Lion doesn't end the London Blitz, I don't see why this would do anything other than reassure the U.S. government that it will be investing strategically rather than reinforcing failure here. Indeed, if anything, it COULD reduce the urgency of lend-lease altogether simply because if the Royal Navy is handed a golden opportunity to finish off what remains of the Kriegsmarine here, which I have absolutely no doubt it would take if offered, that frees up the home defense destroyers to head off into the Atlantic in search of submarines.
 
But it's just as likely to lead to the opposite effect as those who assumed Britain was finished regardless see the German war machine isn't all conquering.

I agree. The voices that say lend-lease would simply be reinforcing failure will presumably be silenced by the burning wreckage of the invasion flotilla as it slowly sinks into the Channel.

Faced with 67,000 troops stuck in a beachhead, lacking supplies I doubt the British are going to break out the Mustard gas.

Overall as others have pointed out this is an impossible scenario, the only way any Germans get ashore is if they manage to swim to the beaches from a sinking barge.

This was my assessment also. There are many sources saying the British intended to use poison gas, but no one can point to an actual standing order, response plan, etc., etc. that actually committed those units to fly to the beaches in the event of an invasion. And if they're not part of the first wave of response, my take was that everyone higher up would soon become so busy completing the destruction in depth of both the flotilla and the landing parties that they would have no time to turn to desperation tactics like poison gas.

Bombarding a POW camp is a waste of resources.
 
I agree. The voices that say lend-lease would simply be reinforcing failure will presumably be silenced by the burning wreckage of the invasion flotilla as it slowly sinks into the Channel.

Yeah defeating Sealion simply proves Britain isn't in imminent danger of collapse, it doesn't change the fact that Nazi Germany controls the whole of Europe, or that it has the USSR as an ally.

This was my assessment also. There are many sources saying the British intended to use poison gas, but no one can point to an actual standing order, response plan, etc., etc. that actually committed those units to fly to the beaches in the event of an invasion. And if they're not part of the first wave of response, my take was that everyone higher up would soon become so busy completing the destruction in depth of both the flotilla and the landing parties that they would have no time to turn to desperation tactics like poison gas.
Bombarding a POW camp is a waste of resources.

I'm sure they would have put it on standby, but no I don't think they would have released the gas bombs the moment the Germans hit the beach, footage of German soldiers marching into captivity would play a lot better than piles of gassed corpses.
 
As far as the unmentionable seamammal planning went, given the "amphibious" assets they had, scattering of units and supplies was expected. With any action by even MTBs and similar of the RN it would have been worse. If only the first and part of a second wave come ashore, they'll never be able to get their act together.
 
Top