How Germany EASILY could have won WW2 if not for one man named Hermann "Meyer"

How could germany have won WW2? well they (in my opinion) got alot closer than most of us would like to admit. This involves Britain being unable to gain the Initiative in the war for the air, or rather, I should say Hermann Goring doesn't idiotically give Britain the air. During 1940, the Luftwaffe almost destroyed the RAF, with a massive Tactical advantage. However the bombings of Radar stations and Airfields, just stopped.... This was due to goring feeiling that they were a waste of time and aircraft, even though they were just beginning to show how serious of a devastating impact they were. But what lets say he didn't stop, and Germany floods Dover and  Brighton with Paratroopers as they planned to, leading to a full scale invasion of the British Isles. Then either Britain outright capitulates in late 1940 or Germany has to deal with the commonwealth whom shouldn't be much trouble mopping up now that Britain is gone. Anyway maybe I think the air is more valuable than it was but I think if "meyer" never got the nickname you might be stuffing a brautwurst down your gob right now.

They could've landed paratroopers but if Britain still refused to surrender after the paratroopers occupied Dover and Brighton then Germany would have a hard time getting supplies past the Royal Navy to the troops in Britain. If Britain surrendered I doubt the Commonwealth would've continued fighting.

Aaronklk wrote:They could've landed paratroopers but if Britain still refused to surrender after the paratroopers occupied Dover and Brighton then Germany would have a hard time getting supplies past the Royal Navy to the troops in Britain. If Britain surrendered I doubt the Commonwealth would've continued fighting.

perhaps, but I think germany's supply doctrine would be focus on using planes to get supplies to and from the isles....

Let's do a comparison of Aug 1940:
Britain had the best navy in the world, but only 25 divisions in Britain, badly armed and supplied, and dispersed from Dover to Glasgow.
Germany had overwhelming air power, a shitty navy and 20 highly trained motorized divisions in Northern France, plus endless paratroopers brigades, all ready to invade Britain.

After a first paratroopers drop on Dover, Brighton, Portsmouth, Southampton and maybe Exeter, let's say, 5000 men, the first basic supplies like medikits and food, would have been dropped by plane. Also, if Hitler succeeded in distracting the Royal Navy for a bit, at least 10-15 divisions would have sailed to Britain with food, guns, ammo, tanks and artillery.
If you know what happened to Eben Emael, you will have an idea of the power of a little number of paratroopers. If all this happened in late August-early September, let's say in October-November we would have a German-occupied Britain.
Consequences:
a)The royal family would flee in Canada.
b)Churchill would be deposed and maybe assassinated.
c)A freshly-made government would unconditionally surrender to Germany.
The peace conference would result similarly to this:
-France would remain the same as July 1940, maybe exceptionally ceding Corsica and/or Tunisia to Italy.
-the old German Colonies would be returned to Germany (Togoland, Kamerun, Namibien, Deutsche Ostafrika)
-Belgium, Luxembourg and maybe the Netherlands annexed to Germany.
-Poland would be left as it was in Oct 1939.
Britain was admired and respected by Hitler, who almost always seeked peace with it. So, MAYBE:
-A nazi-friendly government would be installed;
-India and maybe South Africa would be freed;
-the Royal Navy would be delivered to Germany.

This is my hypothesis.

Francinze wrote:Consequences:
a)The royal family would flee in Canada.
b)Churchill would be deposed and maybe assassinated.
c)A freshly-made government would unconditionally surrender to Germany.
The peace conference would result similarly to this:
-France would remain the same as July 1940, maybe exceptionally ceding Corsica and/or Tunisia to Italy.
-the old German Colonies would be returned to Germany (Togoland, Kamerun, Namibien, Deutsche Ostafrika)
-Belgium, Luxembourg and maybe the Netherlands annexed to Germany.
-Poland would be left as it was in Oct 1939.
Britain was admired and respected by Hitler, who almost always seeked peace with it. So, MAYBE:
-A nazi-friendly government would be installed;
-India and maybe South Africa would be freed;
-the Royal Navy would be delivered to Germany.

This is my hypothesis.

I think those terms would be a bit much. Germany and the UK would have settled for something more lenient.

The Germans would probably evacuate England as soon as they could safely do so; a long-term occupation would be too much of a drain on Germany's resources.

Germany would not annex Belgium or the Netherlands. I can see them annexing Luxembourg, taking Eupen-Malmedy back from Belgium, and taking Alsace-Lorraine back from France, but any further annexations would have little motive or benefit.

The British government would continue to operate as it had; no pro-Nazi government need be installed (unless some pro-Nazi element had already taken power, which might explain the armistice).

India and South Africa would need to be kept loyal to the Crown; independence would not be an option.

Most importantly, there is no way in hell that the Brits would be willing to turn over their navy; even the French wouldn't do that. It's the only thing that keeps them safe and its surrender would not be negotiable. Nor would Germany want control of the Royal Navy; Hitler's fantasy was for the Kriegsmarine and the Royal Navy to sail side-by-side against the US Navy.

In addition, a unilateral withdrawal of the Wehrmacht from Western Europe wouldn't be out of the question as long as the UK was fully pacified; those extra troops and supplies would be sorely needed on the Eastern Front.

Just some political speculation.

I always thought the idea of the Royal Navy holding back a German invasion in the narrow straights of the English Channel was completely backwards. I know Pearl Harbor hadn't happened yet, but surely two countries as tactically advanced as Germany and the UK could see that placing battleships in a more or less stationary location within a few dozen miles of opposing fighter-bomber bases was just asking to have them sunk!

No, I think HitPoint0213 was correct, but for slightly different reasons. First of all, Gorring's idiotic brag that he could crush the British at Dunkirk let 300,000+ troops out of a trap. These would not have been faced by an invading army later that year if they hadn't escaped to begin with. Second of all, in HitPoint0213's scenario the R.A.F. has been crippled before the invasion begins. This means the Royal Navy has virtually no air cover.

The British weren't going to risk their Navy in an area like that without air superiority. I would go so far as to speculate that it was always a bluff until after the "Blitz" shifted to bombing cities. Then the R.A.F. got back on its feet, and could have provided enough cover to the Navy that it might have challenged the invasion.

My strongest argument against myself is that the Prince of Wales and the Repulse actually were sent out without air cover to challenge Japanese landings in Southeast Asia in December of 1941, with the predictable results (they both wound up on the bottom of the sea in a matter of hours after being spotted by the Japanese naval air cover). Thus, it is just possible that neither Britain nor Germany yet understood the proper use of air power against surface ships in 1940.