Worst case scenario for Operation Sea Lion

Can we get a decent TL made that actually have Hitler go ahead with Sealion. CalBear, Von Adler, Thande? We discuss the operation, BUT NOONE WRITES A TL ABOUT IT. *Jumps up and down* I want one;)
 
Considering the fact that the British only contemplated using gas against military forces of a genocidal state invading their country, while Germany murdered millions of Allied citizens by gas, saying that "Churchill was prepared to cross lines that Hitler wasn't" is a dishonesty to say the least.
The same with Luftwaffe-it engaged in terror bombing of Allied cities and civilian population from the start of the war. British didn't start it.

The German approach to the War in the East and the West were vastly different. Germany's war of extermination in the East was completely different from the way it was conducted in the West. So no, its not dishonest, it just so happens it was the truth for the West.
 
Can we get a decent TL made that actually have Hitler go ahead with Sealion. CalBear, Von Adler, Thande? We discuss the operation, BUT NOONE WRITES A TL ABOUT IT. *Jumps up and down* I want one;)

Look in the the link I provided, it is a VERY professional written timeline.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
What if the United Kingdom had analysed this case, and decided that all the divisions are better than some of the divisions. The landing is allowed to proceed with attrition attacks aimed at destroying capital units and aircraft. But troops are allowed to land.

Even if it makes sense as a strategic ploy, the British are never going to allow the sacred soil of England to be polluted by the feet of jackbooted Nazi thugs.

Didn't the Germans use guidebooks to find favourite tourists sites to go after?

You're thinking of the Baedeker Raids of 1942, which aimed at no strategic target but merely at historical buildings in an effort to weaken British morale. When I lived in Canterbury, I often heard the old folks talk with pride about how the great cathedral had been the target of three Luftwaffe attacks but had survived intact. Interestingly, amidst some of the damage caused by the bombing, Roman artifacts were discovered that sort of jump-started the archeological investigation of Roman Canterbury. Cool stuff.
 
Considering the fact that the British only contemplated using gas against military forces of a genocidal state invading their country, while Germany murdered millions of Allied citizens by gas, saying that "Churchill was prepared to cross lines that Hitler wasn't" is a dishonesty to say the least.
The same with Luftwaffe-it engaged in terror bombing of Allied cities and civilian population from the start of the war. British didn't start it.

Perhaps. Although Hitler always nixed the military use of gas - and, without wishing to get bogged down in conspiracy theories, there's no evidence that he personally sanctioned the use of gas on camp inmates.

You can emotionalise this argument as much as you like, but the facts are that Hitler never once ordered or sanctioned the potential use of gas against troops in the field (probably because he was gassed in WWI), but Churchill did, explicitly issuing orders for contingencies to use gas in the event of Sea Lion).

Now, does this make Churchill worse than Hitler? Of course not. Does it make this argument anything more than a petty, pedantic squabble over the semantics of a superficial moral scale? No. What it does mean, though, is that it's not 'dishonesty' to point out that on a factual basis, Churchill did some things that Hitler did not. Hitler did things, however, that were a hell of a lot worse.

And we're not talking about Allied bombing targets, only British ones. The point made was that the Germans didn't bomb British terror targets until the RAF struck Berlin in early 1940 IIRC. Whether the Germans bombed Poland earlier than that is, while tragic, irrelevant to the matter at hand.
 
The conversation is wandering.

Here is the ORBAT for Sea Lion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion_order_of_battle

The most logical scenario is the first wave gets destroyed mostly at scenes with the rest massacred on the beaches Note there are no Panzer divisions in the first wave. What is not discussed in Wiki is the divisions in the first wave are not sent complete in the first wave. Except for the 7th Air Division they are sent with 2 of their 3 infantry regiments. Their artillery regiment is not sent in the first wave but instead they are provided 2-3 batteries of mountain guns. Some of the divisions in the first wave were to be provided an armor component of 1 company of amphibious Pz II's and 1 company of submersible PzIII's

However in Fleming there is some vague discussion of the 3 divisions of VIII AK being even still weaker than the above establishment I just outlined because they would be sent in motorboats not barges due to the long distance involved.

And while we are on the topic of barges not all of those allocated to Sea LLion were to be used in tranporting the first wave.
 
Ok 2 thing's How'd Andrew Harton get banned?

How would a failed Sealion (which everyone here knows is a tautology) affect Geopolitics up until the present day?
 
Last edited:
Top