Had Germany won WWII what would the UK be like?

[Superficial]

except that an unhindered German Luftwaffe could have decimated the British navy.

without fear of fighter intercepts they could have complete control of the channel with their planes. doesn't matter how big the navy was as long as the Germans could just secure a section of the channel they could invade. ships would easily be torn to pieces by air craft.

ive just posted evidence that proves you incorrect by world leading historians??

""Even if the RAF had been defeated the fleet would still have been able to defeat any invasion because fast ships at sea could easily manoeuvre and "were pretty safe from air attack".

 

[Sankari]

Yeah all built by slaves though....

No. Built by Germans. They never used concentration camp labour for anything but the most basic projects. High level infrastructure and architecture would have been built by professionals.

 

[Sankari]

Significantly better?

A tremendous improvement, yes.

 

[[DOD]Asprilla]

Haven't heard of it. Is it a good book?

Very good book. Bad film though with Rutger Hauer. In the book the US never entered the war and consequently Germany won. However, it's not a utopia by any stretch of the imagination.

A hell of a lot cleaner, for a start!

It would have better architecture, superior infrastructure and would be run with greater efficiency. We would have a 21st Century road system (complete with autobahns!) and an excellent rail service.
.

Rail services - Express services are excellent, but the non-express services are old dirty and slow. They run on time because they are so slow.
Clean - not from my experience of living there and graffiti and vandalism are terrible.
Infrastructure - some, but I've sat in enough traffic jams outside Stuttgart and Frankfurt to know sometimes the grass is the same colour on the other side.
Architecture - Each to their own, and I know that Speer had grand plans, but the so did Napoleon. Much for Germany now is pretty nondescript.

I think, had Hitler's Eugenics policy been put into practise, we would be far better off, because only the 'superior' humans would be around. This would surely lead to faster evolution, and thus a better technological position.

You are clearly not not right in so many ways. His eugenics policies were the work of a complete mad man; he claimed the Japanese were Aryan. You probably have ended up with a bunch of dribbling inbreds.

 

[Duff-Man]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1527068/Battle-of-Britain-was-won-at-sea.-Discuss.html

Whilst I applaud your contribution to this thread its now almost common knowledge amongst historians that the British Navy so outmatched the Germas that it made any attempt to invade Britain impractical.

The Battle of Britain was a huge credit to the pilots involved (of ALL nations that contributed not least the more experienced / accurate Poles) but the Navy would have demolished any German attempt to invade - because to invade you need men on the ground ONLY achievable with ships.

You certainly have a good point there, and I'm no historian (as I've already said).

I would point out though, that British Naval superiority would not have been enough to stop a massive amphibian invasion - only to prevent significant reinforcement. A 500,000+ man invasion of the British isles by highly trained German forces would have been difficult to repel.

Besides, once air superiority was achieved, the luftwaffe could have begun targetting British ports and shipping almost at will. It may have taken a few more months, but the British supply system could have been heavily worn down.

I admit, though, that Churchill made as much as possible out of the air war over Britiain, for propaganda purposes. This was probably a good thing, since it wasn't until El-Alamein (almost 2 years later) that he had another real victory to report, and that almost cost him his job!

 

[Kainz]

For some reason the opening scenes of Half Life 2 are floating in my head.

 

[Vonhelmet]

Why would he be wrong?

Because there's no evidence that eugenics works. As far as I'm aware, quite the opposite is true.

 

[Trusty]

Have any of you seen Downfall? Thought it was very good, not sure how correct it is tho. Maybe someone can enlighten me?

 

[Superficial]

You certainly have a good point there, and I'm no historian (as I've already said).

I would point out though, that British Naval superiority would not have been enough to stop a massive amphibian invasion - only to prevent significant reinforcement. A 500,000+ man invasion of the British isles by highly trained German forces would have been difficult to repel.

Besides, once air superiority was achieved, the luftwaffe could have begun targetting British ports and shipping almost at will. It may have taken a few more months, but the British supply system could have been heavily worn down.

I admit, though, that Churchill made as much as possible out of the air war over Britiain, for propaganda purposes. This was probably a good thing, since it wasn't until El-Alamein (almost 2 years later) that he had another real victory to report, and that almost cost him his job!

thanks mate

but as i said, the worlds leading militay historians on the subject have given their view - to be honest the only reason its not common knowledge is because, of course, its a terribly sensitive issue.

I would also add, and i may be wrong, but you appear to be looking at the situation the worng way round - given all the factors the conclusion that should be met with, imo, is that the challange whilst great for both sides, would be tilted in our favour.

 

[petemyster]

Can anyone suggest a book or something about all this? This is turning out to be incrediably interesting.

 

[Sankari]

Just remember who captured Tobruk, changed the course of the battle at El-Alamein and drove the Japanese out of New Guinea!

 

[doodah]

Can anyone suggest a book or something about all this? This is turning out to be incrediably interesting.

Whilst not a book, you should watch Copenhagen. Based on a play about the meeting between physicists Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg in 1941. Really enjoyed it.

 

[KNiVES]

Have any of you seen Downfall? Thought it was very good, not sure how correct it is tho. Maybe someone can enlighten me?

It's supposed to be very historically accurate. The only 'speculated' part in the film are the deaths of Goebbels and his wife but it's a small detail. The film assumes he shoots his wife and then himself, but nobody knows the specifics. The fate of Junge, Hitler's secretary is far more sinister than the film would have you believe too (she was portrayed as eventually escaping with a little boy, but in reality was captured and raped by Russian soldiers). As far as I know, those are the only parts that (may) differ from reality.

 

[Duff-Man]

Can anyone suggest a book or something about all this? This is turning out to be incrediably interesting.

I've read plenty of books and seen dozens of documentaries, but for me the best is still the "world at war" documentary series which was made in the 70s.

Having been made less than 30 years after the war finished, they have access to high ranking primary sources involved in the conflict (including Karl Wolf - Himmlers adjutant, for example, and Hitler's private secretary who was there in the bunker at the end). Also, it presents the just the facts, and leaves everything else to the opinions of people who were actually involved. Narration by Lawrence Olivier finishes it off nicely. Really classy stuff.

It's a 26 part series (10 DVDs in the box set), and it covers almost every aspect of the war. I can't give you a link, since they're all competitors, but look to the rainforesty site (not the playful one - they're more expensive). Well worth the money if you ask me!

 

[elroberto]

I'd have been alright Tall, blonde and blue eyes. Would have spent my time boffing countless swedish birds in an attempt to create some sort of uber-blonde in a eugenic experiment...still I'm glad we won.

 

[Duff-Man]

Have any of you seen Downfall? Thought it was very good, not sure how correct it is tho. Maybe someone can enlighten me?

I watched it not too long since - I thought it was great. As far as I can tell, it ties in well with the available details about what happened in Hitler's final days (which are admittedly a bit sketchy). As far as dramatisations are concerned, I think you can consider it a good representation of what might have happened in Hitler's bunker in the last few weeks of the war.

 

[Delvis]

In answer to the OP...

Better.

 

[Trusty]

Have you read the rest of the thread??

 

[Sankari]

Have you read the rest of the thread??

Even if he hasn't, I think the answer is still "better".

Just imagine: council estates would have a gas chamber at one end, a crematorium at the other, and a soap factory somewhere in the middle.

Can't complain, tbh.

 

[V4NT0M]

Thoughts?

Insufficient data.