Split Thread WWII & Appeasement

[SpitfireIX]

Why didn't the Americans intervene on behalf of the Czechs at Munich in 1938 then? They were a signatory to the Treaty of Versailles, and America had the military clout.

America was not a party to the Treaty of Versailles, as the US Senate had declined to ratify it. As for American "military clout," in 1938 the US Army was about the size of Portugal's. The US Army Air Corps had a total of about 70 fighters comparable to the Hurricane (Seversky P-35), and its most modern bomber (Douglas B-18) was already obsolete.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The US Army Air Corps had a total of about 70 fighters comparable to the Hurricane (Seversky P-35),

That's a generous assessment of the P-35.

Dave

 

[Henri McPhee]

President Wilson was involved in the Treaty of Versailles, but it all became mixed up in the complications of American politics. The Germans were fearfully aggrieved about it with all its territorial demands and reparations, and many people in Britain later on had doubt about it, including Lloyd George. The British public had a sort of 'who cares' attitude about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles

The closest the treaty came to passage was on 19 November 1919, as Lodge and his Republicans formed a coalition with the pro-Treaty Democrats, and were close to a two-thirds majority for a Treaty with reservations, but Wilson rejected this compromise and enough Democrats followed his lead to permanently end the chances for ratification. Among the American public as a whole, the Irish Catholics and the German Americans were intensely opposed to the treaty, saying it favored the British.

 

[HansMustermann]

Would it be too much to ask how Germany was going to bomb Britain into submission without nuclear weapons? That is the only occasion in history where bombing int submission has actually worked.

Even there I would argue that it wasn't JUST the nukes. At that point the US had successfully taken any island the Japanese had ever held, and had just taken Okinawa in just two months.

The only debate at that point was whether they are willing to risk a few million soldiers invading Japan itself, rather than whether they COULD take Japan itself. (Although it should be noted: the Japanese were also looking at a few million of their own dead if that invasion happened.) The hope was that, perhaps with the USSR as mediators, a compromise peace could be achieved that allowed Japan to save face.

HOWEVER, what actually happened weren't just the nukes, but the fact that the USSR suddenly joined the war against Japan and started blitzing through Manchuria. Not only the prospect of them being mediators was gone, but the size of the army attacking Japan pretty much quadrupled over night, and wiped out half their industry within days. And with Stalin you knew he ain't going to be afraid to get a few million of his people killed to get what he wanted.

Even worse, the Russians wanted to split Japan, like Germany had been split. As losses of face go, THIS threatened to be the ultimate one.

So while yes, the nukes added a lot of serious threat, and I'm not minimizing it, we can't forget that it was combined with a very very real and serious threat of ground invasion. In fact, at that point the ground invasion was about to begin.

It wasn't ONLY the nukes that won the day, but the fact that they were combined with a massive invasion about to begin.

 

[SpitfireIX]

That's a generous assessment of the P-35.

I know; I was just trying to give Henri the benefit of the doubt. ETA: Not that it significantly strengthens his argument.

 

[Garrison]

President Wilson was involved in the Treaty of Versailles, but it all became mixed up in the complications of American politics.

Which is an odd way of saying 'my previous claim was wrong'.

The Germans were fearfully aggrieved about it with all its territorial demands and reparations, and many people in Britain later on had doubt about it, including Lloyd George. The British public had a sort of 'who cares' attitude about it:

And the rest is utter irrelevance again.

 

[Henri McPhee]

The Hurricane and the Spitfire both entered service before Munich. And the only reason the Luftwaffe hadn't had problems previously was that they had the luxury of attacking nations that either lacked an airforce, or where the airforce had been destroyed on the ground by Luftwaffe planes able to attack from short range because the targets were adjacent to their front line bases.

The mainstay of the RAF at the time of Munich for the air defence of London was the Gloster Gladiator, which was not fast enough. The RAF had deficiencies at the time, which was not the fault of Chamberlain, and the number of Spitfires in service at the time of Munich was pitifully few. Churchill talking a lot of hot air did not put that right. The matter is mentioned at this website:

http://members.madasafish.com/~d_hodgkinson/Hawker-The Battle of Britain - Facts and Myths.htm

Without the Munich Agreement of September 1938 the Battle of Britain could have started 12 or 18 months earlier.
At that time there were only two fully operational squadrons of Hurricanes. How many RAF Squadrons would still be flying biplanes? Would what Spitfires and Hurricanes that we did have been using 2-bladed propellers and low grade fuel?

 

[Dave Rogers]

The mainstay of the RAF at the time of Munich for the air defence of London was the Gloster Gladiator, which was not fast enough.

Except, as we've seen, in Norway, where it suddenly magically became fast enough to shoot down Me110's and He111's.

The matter is mentioned at this website:

http://members.madasafish.com/~d_hodgkinson/Hawker-The Battle of Britain - Facts and Myths.htm

Which does nothing to defend your assertion that Germany could have won the war in a week.

Dave

 

[jimbob]

Except, as we've seen, in Norway, where it suddenly magically became fast enough to shoot down Me110's and He111's.



Which does nothing to defend your assertion that Germany could have won the war in a week.

Dave

As I said before, Germany could have sent unescorted bombers without any bombs and they would probably be fast enough that not too many would get shot down.

 

[Garrison]

The mainstay of the RAF at the time of Munich for the air defence of London was the Gloster Gladiator, which was not fast enough.

By now you should be perfectly well aware this is simply not true. The Gladiator was perfectly capable of intercepting any German bomber that could have reached Britain in 1938, your willful ignorance not withstanding.

The RAF had deficiencies at the time, which was not the fault of Chamberlain, and the number of Spitfires in service at the time of Munich was pitifully few.

He had been PM for 18 months at the time of Munich, whose fault was it then?

 

[jimbob]

Garrison, I refer you to Dave Roger's cat

 

[Andy_Ross]

Why would the RN have been sitting ducks?
Germany had very little success against ships at sea. look a tthe Channel raids in 1940, no warships sunk and very few merchant ships hit.
Even in the Med it wasn't the warships that were being sunk when they had room to manouver. it was the merchant ships they were escorting.

Why would they have had any more success in 1938?

 

[HansMustermann]

As I said before, Germany could have sent unescorted bombers without any bombs and they would probably be fast enough that not too many would get shot down.

No they weren't. They could maybe get to the target, if the Gladiators were on the ground and the British totally and absolutely couldn't figure out how to keep some in the air at all times. But by the time they were heading back, I'm pretty sure a lot of planes would have caught up with them.

 

[jimbob]

No they weren't. They could maybe get to the target, if the Gladiators were on the ground and the British totally and absolutely couldn't figure out how to keep some in the air at all times. But by the time they were heading back, I'm pretty sure a lot of planes would have caught up with them.

Shh I was being kind. Maybe they did it at night, with no bombs, and decided to "do a Dolittle" landing in Russia Ireland.

I didn't say it was a good idea.

 

[HansMustermann]

Well, I suppose that's one way to get 100% of your planes lost

 

[HansMustermann]

Anyway, let's look at what was available to fill the gaps.

An obvious choice would have been the Curtiss P-36 "Mohawk", for example, which had more than enough speed to catch any bomber even in level flight. In the real world, the British didn't buy it, because the Spit had better acceleration. If we're discussing an alternate history where the Battle Of Britain happens in 1938, the British could easily order a few hundreds of those to supplement their own aircraft production.

Another choice would be the F4F Wildcat (called Martlet by the Brits), which entered production in 1937, and had even higher speed. And the British had already placed orders before it even went into production. While again these orders were limited at first, and at first only to upgrade some carrier aircraft, they could easily ramp up the orders in an emergency.

Etc.

 

[dudalb]

And when it comes to the Gloster Gladiator, let's not forget Faith,Hope,and Charity....

 

[dudalb]

Anyway, let's look at what was available to fill the gaps.

An obvious choice would have been the Curtiss P-36 "Mohawk", for example, which had more than enough speed to catch any bomber even in level flight. In the real world, the British didn't buy it, because the Spit had better acceleration. If we're discussing an alternate history where the Battle Of Britain happens in 1938, the British could easily order a few hundreds of those to supplement their own aircraft production.

Another choice would be the F4F Wildcat (called Martlet by the Brits), which entered production in 1937, and had even higher speed. And the British had already placed orders before it even went into production. While again these orders were limited at first, and at first only to upgrade some carrier aircraft, they could easily ramp up the orders in an emergency.

Etc.

The Brits, amazing enough for a country so dependent on sea power, had real problems with getting first rate Carrier Aircraft. The attempts to "Navalize" the Hurricane and Spitfire had only modest success,and by the end of the war the ROyal Navy was using mainly US Carrier craft on board their carriers.
The Corsair was particularly liked by the RN pilots.

 

[Andy_Ross]

That was due to the RAF and Air Ministry claiming ownership of everything that flew and opposing any aircraft under Navy control.
They were worried that as the new and junior service they would have some of their aircraft taken away.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Why would the RN have been sitting ducks?
Germany had very little success against ships at sea. look a tthe Channel raids in 1940, no warships sunk and very few merchant ships hit.
Even in the Med it wasn't the warships that were being sunk when they had room to manouver. it was the merchant ships they were escorting.

Why would they have had any more success in 1938?

Yo are just overlooking what happened at Malta, let alone what Japanese aircraft did to American and British Naval shipping:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/siege_malta_01.shtml

Pedestal

The Italian fleet's surrender in 1943 ended a three-year battle for control of shipping in the Mediterranean ©

The rest of the naval war almost came to a standstill, as fourteen merchant ships were sent on their way to Malta, covered by three aircraft carriers (with a fourth ferrying Spitfires), two battleships, seven cruisers and twenty four destroyers. The Germans and Italians, fearing an invasion, put in an equally huge effort against the convoy.

First a U-boat sank HMS Eagle, then the destroyer Foresight was hit by an Italian torpedo bomber (and eventually had to be sunk). A merchant ship was sunk by another torpedo bomber, and the carrier Indomitable was heavily damaged by three bombs before the heavy covering force turned westwards, leaving Rear Admiral HM Burrough with four cruisers and a dozen destroyers to shepherd the remaining merchantmen to Malta.

The rest of the naval war almost came to a standstill ...

The Italian submarine Axum then succeeded in torpedoing the cruisers Nigeria and Cairo, sinking the latter and causing the former to turn back. The loss of these two cruisers, with their specialist equipment, prevented adequate fighter direction and opened up the convoy to air attack.

The cruiser Kenya was damaged by an Italian submarine, and then the cruiser Manchester was damaged by an Italian motor torpedo boat, in such a difficult situation that her captain felt forced to scuttle her. The fatal mix of aircraft, submarines and motor torpedo boats sank merchant ship after merchant ship until only three were left to sail into Grand Harbour. Another two, most notably the heavily damaged tanker Ohio, carrying Park's precious fuel, remained afloat and arrived later.