Could Germany Have Invaded and Conquered Britain?

The blog will attempt to answer questions about World War 2 that persist even 60 years after the war ended.



Question 1: Could Germany have successfully invaded and conquered Britain in World War 2?

Answer: I get this question more frequently on my Germany in World War 2 web site than any other question. It is also my personal number one question.

After the German blitzkrieg victory over France in 1940, Britain, at first glance, appeared ready to be conquered. A large part of the British army after Dunkirk was virtually disarmed since they had had to leave their weapons on the Dunkirk beaches. The argument goes that Germany had to strike quickly to invade and conquer Britain. Then North Africa, the Middle East, and Russia would have fallen over like a row of dominos.

Germany would have won the war!

Would Britain Have Folded if Invaded? The assumption that Britain could have been easily conquered is an erroneous assumption in my opinion. Sure, the army was badly hurt but the British Navy was still powerful and the fairly small Royal Air Force was very competent. Britain was not whipped yet!

But Germany's major problem was that they had only a small navy with virtually no transport vessels to land troops in Britain. They would have had to depend on paratroopers and on river barges to transport soldiers across the English channel. The thin-hulled river barges would have been sitting ducks for the RAF and the British Navy. And, with the homeland at stake, Britain would thrown everything into the battle. No doubt, the German Luftwaffe would also have been thrown wholeheartedly into the battle against the British Navy whose vessels would have been sittling ducks in the narrow English Channel.

The resulting battle would have been one that would have lived in infamy because of its fury and because so much was at stake. Loss of life and equipment on both sides would have been horrendous. There is little doubt that German paratroopers could have seized a beachhead along the British coast but holding on that beachhead would have been difficult. The British would have fought back like cornered rats with every weapon they could get their hands on: World War 1 weapons, shotguns, hunting rifles, pistols, pitchforks, glass bottles filled with gasoline, etc. And what about America? Could we have sat back and allowed our British buddies go down the drain. Hardly! Our army was small and weak at the time but we would have done what we could. Roosevelt was that kind of man.

It is likely that at many as a hundred thousand British soldiers, sailors, and airmen would have died in the battle. Also likely is that one-half the RAF would have been destroyed along with perhaps one-quarter of the British Navy. On the German side, the casualties would have been at least equal to that of the British. (Can you imagine the horror of the German soldiers trapped in river barges as the barges were sent to the briny depths?)

One of the keys to the battle would have been the fine leadership of the RAF. The RAF fighters would certainly have concentrated on sinking the soldier-laden barges and avoided meaningless air duels with German fighters. (Similar to their strategy during the Battle of Britain when that battle took place.)

When the greatest land-sea-air battle of all time was over, I believe the British would have held off the Germans.

No, I think Hitler carefully considered the risks involved in invading Britain and wisely decided against it. He had bigger fish to fry with the upcoming attack on Russia. Hitler was only a corporal during his military service but he had a far better feel for strategy than many of his generals.

But many experts say Hitler had no choice. He had to roll the dice and try to conquer Britain. Otherwise, the British would remain a thorn in his backside (as they did) as he moved against Russia.