How many islands does Germany have?

WW2: could / should Germany have invaded the Shetland Islands and the Faeroe Islands?

  • If the Germans had managed to invade the Shetland Islands and the Faeroe Islands they could have stopped a large portion of the food and supplies that Britain got from merchant shipping. The amount of fish Britain got could have been reduced by 25% perhaps (a guesstimate!). Britain could have been starved into submission. Lets not forget that the Germans managed to invade Crete.

  • Answer:

    You seem to be overlooking the fact that the British enjoyed naval superiority for the entire war. The Germans were able to use air power in the mediterranean during the first part of the war, but the Shetlands and Faroes were too far away, and by the time longer-range aircraft would have made the proposition feasible the allies had air superiority too. Had the Germans tried to invade a remote island group in these circumstances it's the Germans who would have encountered the supply chain problems trying to defend them: British supply lines would have been hardly affected at all, since the Germans wouldn't have been any better placed to harass them than they already were with their U-boat fleet. EDIT: Since you seem hooked on this idea let me address this a different way. You are correct, that it would have been perfectly feasible for the Germans to invade the Shetlands and Faroe islands, and perhaps they'd even have been able to hang on to them for a while. The question is what benefit it would have brought them. Personally I don't believe your 25% number, but even if it's true, you need to bear in mind that the fishing industry in the Faroes (and probably the Shetlands) increased greatly during WW2 precisely BECAUSE they were in British hands - had they not been, Britain would have used other safe fisheries instead, so the actual impact would have been significantly smaller than 25%. I also don't believe for a second that a 25% drop in available fish would have left Britain starving. It might perhaps have led to a less varied diet, but the calorific value of fish in the WW2 diet was not as significant as you seem to believe. The German Navy already had excellent naval bases in the North Atlantic, both in Norway and France - it's difficult to see how an additional naval base, had they been able to create one, would have done them any good. Additionally, the naval base itself would have been almost impossible to supply. Supply could only have been done by surface ships, and these would have been simply too easy for the British to find and sink.

CRASH JP MORGAN BUY SILVER - BOB at Yahoo! Answers Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

They were far too busy on the eastern front. That was where the real action took place - Prussian territory, Germanifying eastern lands. Interesting question, but maybe they invaded Crete to get some sunshine and olives:) Just visited an interesting exhibition in Berlin about Germany/Poland during WW2, so interesting stuff.

so

Come on, Put your soldiers away now & go & get your hands washed big man, there's a good boy It's nearly time for your tea & It's your favourate, - Haggis

Monkfish

Small issue of the royal navy and being within very easy distance of the RAF bombers. I don't think it would have been a very sensible approach then again Hitler was a lunatic so maybe he wanted too. Lol sorry if I offended you. I understand your thinking I just don't see how they could have achieved the goal without sustaining massive loses.. They would have to remove the U-boats from service on the Atlantic also so more supplies would have come in that way. They would be deploying their forces in a place they couldn't provide any air support too. Against a nation with a strong air force and navy in striking distance and Commando's ready to mount a counter strike. They were having enough trouble holding on too their own resources in Norway from Commando raids.. I don't think it is a realistic option at all it would have been more damaging to Germany than Britain in terms of resources Sorry if you felt I was being rude I just have a slightly sarcastic style. It is very true that WW2 was a war of resources which is why Britain fought so hard to control the med and the suez canal. Britain then had very large and established farming and food production.. Coal steel etc. The only way to defeat england would have been to destroy its manufacturing base.. Which is what they tried to do but the Luftwaffe failed to defeat the RAF and suffered massive losses.

Mike

Och, look at Mike patronising you like that, Big Bob. If i were you I'd shove your U-boot so far up his arze he'll need the Royal Navy to pick the intestines out his teeth

Monkfish

no becuase are R.A.F was better then the LUFFWAFFE and we would of bombed the islands ift the nazis had basis on they could only use u boats for a while but then we got a radar so we would see them anyway

no, they should have concentrated their bombings on industrial targets instead of civilian ones.

IndianaJohn

They would have been isolated by the Royal Navy

brainstorm

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.