Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kit's all yours: British Army will leave 40% of its equipment in Afghanistan
Mirror ^ | 7 Feb 2013 18:27 | Chris Hughes

Posted on 02/07/2013 11:13:49 AM PST by Pan_Yan

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 last
To: nascarnation
Yes, but it was a British victory.

US combat troops didn't land in North Africa until after the battle of El Alamein.

Rommel was prevented from re-supplying his forces, and Montgomery was able to supply his, because of the British victory in the siege of Malta. By the time of El Alamein, the Luftwaffe in the Mediterranean was spent and British Supermarine Spitfires pretty much roamed at will.

61 posted on 02/08/2013 2:22:18 PM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Winniesboy

Edgerton.

And yes it is a superb book. One that should be taught in history classes and be the subject of a major documentary.


62 posted on 02/08/2013 2:27:05 PM PST by the scotsman (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Mashood
They had to increase shipments because most of it was sitting on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean.

Hardly, since the increased tonnage I quoted (18.7 million to 20+ million) was the floating usable shipping tonnage on those two dates. In other words every hull lost to U-boats was replaced, and more. One factor contributing to this was the large number of merchant ships from countries occupied by the Germans which escaped to Britain and spent the rest of the war under the British flag. For instance, the entire Norwegian tanker fleet (then the third largest in the world) did this. Britain ended the war as it had begun, with the world's largest merchant fleet.

63 posted on 02/09/2013 1:23:57 AM PST by Winniesboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

“Good god, where did you learn your history?.”

I thought the conversation was centered around 1940... am I mistaken?

“Firstly, by 1942, the worst of the Nazi attempt to blockade us was over.”

Really? Facts are that in 1941 over 500 ships were sunk, and 1942 over 1100 sunk that year. In tonnage, 1941: 2.5 million tons of materiel, 1942: double 1941 losses... 5.6 million tons. These losses were unsustainable.

Not “by 1942”... 1942 was the worst year for the allies on the Atlantic sea lanes. Not only Britain but Russia too... ergo the Battle for the Atlantic. The Nazis weren’t blockading you... Britain had no resources to blockade (you were eating your leather shoes, remember)... they were blockading the US... most traffic was going one way... to England and Russia. Not much coming back.

“Secondly, and contrary to popular myth, in WW2, the British people grew most of the food they ate.”

You had to... nothing was getting in to fully resupply your country until mid-1943.


64 posted on 02/11/2013 8:05:08 AM PST by Mashood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson