General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: the submarine role...- help! (and thanks!)
Posted by:
Fredrik Härenstam
()
Date: April 25, 2001 02:46PM
<HTML>First, thanks for replying, ppl!
Secondary, perhaps I chose my words badly in the prior post, so here\'s some further :
With that the WWII was the first large-scale usage of U-boats, I mean that prior to the era, the average uboat operated more as a surface ship than a submarine; the most kills in WWI was by the boats\' deck guns, no?
In WWII, however, the avergae submarine operated more in a (literally) sub-marine state than before? (I pose it as a question; the information is from the books I maneged to get my hands on, from here)
I realize the U-boat itself was not part of the german expansion plans, but did it -- being a major bulk of the German Navy -- actually allow/ease further expansion on land -- to the east --, due to its sinking of a great deal of merchantmen, and it providing good competition for the Royal Navy in controlling the northern seas ( and therefore perhaps holding off an allied invasion longer?) ?
To state it clearly; my question/assumption (prior to research) was that the German U-Boat played a significant role in the Battle of the Atlantic (and therefore hindered allied shipping into Europe; supplies, men, etc.), and therefore (in the first 3/4\'s of the war) held off an massive allied invasion for a significant time, the time which was used on operation barbarossa; more or less moving over the majority of the kriegsmahine (spelling?) to eastern Europe; more or less leaving western Europe open.
Why didn\'t allied forces invade when Stalin so pleaded? Why did they invade first after a good deal of European Sovjet had been taken over, and first after the turning points on the Eastern front? did the German navy have any role in it? (and mainly, the submarine bulk of it?)
After France was defeated (not entirely, but mainly), the only true enemies to Germany was overseas or to the East. Panzer troops were deployed large-scale in the east, and a great bulk of the governmental funding went in that direction. However, what kept Western Europe \'free\' for so long?
false? or true? - I realize there\'s a lot of generalization going on in such statements, but the focus is analyzing; may my assumption be right or wrong, it\'s what supports the analytical conclusion that matters. Again, please help! </HTML>
Secondary, perhaps I chose my words badly in the prior post, so here\'s some further :
With that the WWII was the first large-scale usage of U-boats, I mean that prior to the era, the average uboat operated more as a surface ship than a submarine; the most kills in WWI was by the boats\' deck guns, no?
In WWII, however, the avergae submarine operated more in a (literally) sub-marine state than before? (I pose it as a question; the information is from the books I maneged to get my hands on, from here)
I realize the U-boat itself was not part of the german expansion plans, but did it -- being a major bulk of the German Navy -- actually allow/ease further expansion on land -- to the east --, due to its sinking of a great deal of merchantmen, and it providing good competition for the Royal Navy in controlling the northern seas ( and therefore perhaps holding off an allied invasion longer?) ?
To state it clearly; my question/assumption (prior to research) was that the German U-Boat played a significant role in the Battle of the Atlantic (and therefore hindered allied shipping into Europe; supplies, men, etc.), and therefore (in the first 3/4\'s of the war) held off an massive allied invasion for a significant time, the time which was used on operation barbarossa; more or less moving over the majority of the kriegsmahine (spelling?) to eastern Europe; more or less leaving western Europe open.
Why didn\'t allied forces invade when Stalin so pleaded? Why did they invade first after a good deal of European Sovjet had been taken over, and first after the turning points on the Eastern front? did the German navy have any role in it? (and mainly, the submarine bulk of it?)
After France was defeated (not entirely, but mainly), the only true enemies to Germany was overseas or to the East. Panzer troops were deployed large-scale in the east, and a great bulk of the governmental funding went in that direction. However, what kept Western Europe \'free\' for so long?
false? or true? - I realize there\'s a lot of generalization going on in such statements, but the focus is analyzing; may my assumption be right or wrong, it\'s what supports the analytical conclusion that matters. Again, please help! </HTML>
