Britain and WWII ?

Question

So the British empire was the largest empire in history with its global power. During WWII, Nazi Germany nearly made Britain collapsed if Americans didn't assist them.

I don't understand how Britain had such a large empire, and yet they were struggling to fight back Germany. Anyone know why?

Answer 1

A) A lot of Britain's military was stationed thousands of miles away throughout the empire whereas Germany had their entire military concentrated in one place.



B) Britain was primarily a naval power and most of its strength that built the empire was in its navy. The Royal Navy would have easily defeated the Kriegsmarine (German navy) but that's not much use in a war on land.



C) Britain is an island, so once France fell it was difficult to keep troops in Europe supplied and re-enforced enough to fight Germany across the sea from Britain.



D) Due to the fact that the main threat to Britain wasn't invasion (the Germans didn't have enough suitable landing craft or control of the English channel) but bombardment and starvation the battle for survival was fought mainly in the air and against the German submarines that targeted supply convoys. This effectivley cancelled out the army and navy and left it up to the smaller Royal air force (who won).



E) Britain's economy relied heavily on exporting industrial goods like steel and textiles to other countries, this is where the immense wealth that built the empire came from. During the war most factories were turned into military factories and couldn't produce regular things to sell. It was also difficult to physically export things to be sold with a war on.



F) Britain's most powerful asset was its navy, while its army was well trained and well equipped but small. The German Blitzkreig tactic involved smashing quickly through the enemy lines with columns of tanks and routing them before they could set up proper defensive positions. The only effective tactic against this was to have lots of space to retreat into and a massive army to wait for the Germans behind the front lines (as Hitler discovered in Russia), neither of which Britain had.



G) In between WW1 and 2 the Germans had been specialising their army for Blitzkreig tactics. This meant that they had well trained soldiers and much superior tanks.

The French assumed WW2 would be trench warfare like WW1 and so had few tanks, aircraft and no reserves behind the front lines to protect Paris. The German tanks just smashed through this and continued unapposed to Paris.

The British (as the inventors of the tank) had tanks, but not nearly as many or as well built as the Germans, however, they had a very well trained army and a similar (if not superior) air force (with aircraft like the Hurricane, Supermarine Spitfire, Halifax and Lancaster bombers) this meant that they had just about the right armaments to counter the Germans, but were not superior enough or prepared enough to defeat them single handedly.

Answer 2

From the time World War 2 in Europe started to the time in which the US became a belligerent nation, Great Britain's war record in those two years consisted of being forcefully ejected from continental Europe three times by the Nazi's. It's a historical fact that prior to America's involvement, Great Britain had an unbroken string of humiliating defeats on land. The British were thrown out of France, Greece and Norway. In Africa, the Nazi's were within spitting distance of the Suez Canal. Japan conquered Singapore with a invading force that numbered less than a third of the British defenders. The British also go on to lose Borneo, Hong Kong and Burma. And the British were incapable of defending Australia. By 1942, Great Britain was only 1 or 2 months away from starvation due to the depredations of Nazi U-Boats. It was impossible for the British to replace those ship losses.Only American entry into the war reversed that trend. By 1943 American shipyards were launching ships faster than the U-Boats could sink them. If the US had not entered the war in 1941, Great Britain would have been starved into submission by mid-1942. As for Americans entering the war late, maybe they did, but so did the British. World War 2 really started in 1937 when Japan invaded China. Great Britain was NOT in the war from the very beginning. So while Americans may have entered the war later than the British, the US fought the war simultaneously on two fronts. The US was in effect, doing double time and double duty while the British were the junior partners in Europe. If the US had not been alongside the British on the Rhine in 1945, the Soviets would have ejected Great Britain from the continent for a fourth time. The US fought in every battle in western Europe while defeating Japan in the Pacific without any help from the British.

Answer 3

It speaks for itself- British military resources were spread throughout the world. Germany could focus solely on winning a war in Europe and they had shorter supply lines than the British who had to be supplied by sea from their empire. Britain was a sea power- most of its military spending went on the Royal Navy and it took time to raise and equip a large army to match the one the Germans already had in 1940.

Answer 4

After WW1, Britain (and Allies) demobilized the majority of their armed forces and didn't rebuild them. In the 1930's, against the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was rebuilding their armed forces.

When WW2 broke out, the German armed forces had many more men and much more equipment. (guns, artillery, tanks)

Answer 5

The Germans out-teched them with both weapons and tactics.

Answer 6

search on Google about the differences between WWI and WWII

Answer 7

Germany had great mobolization on their side which was key.