WW II could we have won without the Muslims?

[jakarta]

Er No the battles to take malta started BEFORE the Summer of 1940 with Mussolini and continued with the Germans throughout 1941. Hitler was so incensed with the faliure to take Malta he sent dozens more planes to blow it out of the Med.

In fact since 1938 Mussolini and Hitler wanted malta as the stepping stone to North africa. If Malta had fallen before the BOB Hitler might not have tried to bomb Britain as he would have over run N africa and that is why Rommel thought it cost Germany the war.

Italy were not trying to take Malta BEFORE the summer of 1940 as they didn't declare War until June 10th 1940! I have read Fortess Malta An Island Under Siege and that is clear.

Please don't attempt to rewrite History, the fact is that 1940 and the Battle of Britain was pivotal in the War.

Had we lost then Germany would have had a completely free hand in attacking Russia (they might well have won ) and America would have stayed neutral.

Malta and North Africa would have been an irrelevance

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

I know the OP posed the question about the Muslims having an influence on the outcome of WWII and agree that maybe their contribution has been underestimated but am not sure it was a deciding factor. IMHO if anything the Muslims had more of an impact on WWI, principally with the Turks being a major ally of the Germans and some Middle eastern muslims tribes fighting on 'our' side in Eastern Europe and Mesopotamia. Think 'Lawrence of Arabia' etc. and the subsequent UK/US invasions of Persia to protect the oilfields. My Grandfather took part in two campaigns one that entered the Turkish front via Russia and secondly entering Mesopotamia via Basra and Baghdad, remarkably similar to Bush & Blair's recent Iraq war. The latter led to the establishment of what we now know to be Iran and Iraq.

I do agree that the Russians were probably a very major factor once Hitler made the fatal error of being distracted into starting an eastern front and compounded by the intelligence breakthroughs by Bletchley Park that gave the Allies warning of most of the Germans key plans.

Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin knew in late 1943 that the war was turning in the allies favour and started planning for the final defeat of Germany and subsequent landscape across Europe. In early 1944 (well ahead of the end of the war) several airfields in East Anglia that were still very active in the bombing of Germany were shut down whilst they were rebuilt to accomodate the US B29 heavy bombers that would counter the Soviet threat to the west that was already being recognised by the UK and US, already anticipating the onset of the Cold War. I think it was very well understood just how powerful the threat would be once Russia had overrun Germany. Hence how timely it was to agree on the division of Germany in order to prevent the Russians gaining a greater foothold into western Europe.

 

[northstandnorth]

I know the OP posed the question about the Muslims having an influence on the outcome of WWII and agree that maybe their contribution has been underestimated but am not sure it was a deciding factor. IMHO if anything the Muslims had more of an impact on WWI, principally with the Turks being a major ally of the Germans and some Middle eastern muslims tribes fighting on 'our' side in Eastern Europe and Mesopotamia. Think 'Lawrence of Arabia' etc.

Countered by the 1,000,000 Indian army troops that fought on the fields of Europe in WW1 ,again proportionally a third Muslim including Cavalry regiments regarded as among the finest troops fighting the Germans.

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

Fair point NSN - and I am not disagreeing, but out of interest how many of the 1m Indians on the western front were Muslim? I'm not an expert so it would help update my perspective on things.

 

[Race]

i may be wrong but i recall reading a book about the paras and they had a lot of admiration for certain ss units. i think the book was called green eyed boys but as i said, i could be mistaken

 

[jakarta]

In early 1944 (well ahead of the end of the war) several airfields in East Anglia that were still very active in the bombing of Germany were shut down whilst they were rebuilt to accomodate the US B29 heavy bombers that would counter the Soviet threat to the west that was already being recognised by the UK and US, already anticipating the onset of the Cold War. I think it was very well understood just how powerful the threat would be once Russia had overrun Germany. Hence how timely it was to agree on the division of Germany in order to prevent the Russians gaining a greater foothold into western Europe.

I'm very interested in this claim - I have read extensively about the US 8th Air Force and have never heard of this nor have I read of any US air bases being shut down so they could be modified for B29 use - what is your source?

 

[northstandnorth]

Fair point NSN - and I am not disagreeing, but out of interest how many of the 1m Indians on the western front were Muslim? I'm not an expert so it would help update my perspective on things.

Sorry,exact numbers are hard to determine because India had many principalities supplying to the war effort virtual private armies,mixed religions due to the Caste and Class divides but generally regarded as about a third Muslim.

 

[northstandnorth]

With Remembrance Day today, Somaiya Khan-Piachaud and Ayman Khwaja remember the sacrifice of Muslim soldiers, who gave their lives and their limbs in the name of duty in both the first and second World Wars.


(This feature was first published in Issue 62, November 2009)



     Inscribed in stone, along with tens of thousands of other missing war dead, are the names of Muhammad Aslam, Abdullah Khan, Ahmad Khan and Muhammad Usman. Visit the Menin Gate at Ypres in Belgium and you will see these and numerous other obviously Muslim names on the memorial that is dedicated to the commemoration of soldiers killed in the Ypres Salient of the First World War, whose resting places are unknown. It is a large Hall of Memory, honouring 54,896 British and Commonwealth soldiers who could not be buried, their names cut into vast panels.

The marble in Ypres that bear these names will endure, but they remain cold and silent. As a country – and as Muslims in particular – we have failed to ÿ honour the memory of those who fought to protect the freedoms we enjoy today. The memorial in Ypres testifies to the service of Muslim soldiers but we, their descendants and their debtors, have neglected to remember the scope of their sacrifice.

Certainly, the time is ripe to acknowledge this: too many of us are either unfamiliar with the fact that Muslims too had been embroiled in the “war to end all wars”, or lack an understanding of their contributions. Military historian Major Gordon Corrigan says the role of the British Indian Army was vital to the war effort; had they not helped fortify the front line during the First World War the Germans might well have broken through and made it to the ports on the English Channel. “The Punjabi Musselman was regarded as the backbone of the old Indian army, and constituted about a third of the British Indian Army. Known for their reliability, they were steady men who could be depended on to carry out any task at hand.”


Forgotten Heroes - The Muslim Contribution | Feature Articles | Features | November 2009 | emel - the muslim lifestyle magazine

 

[Norman Potting]

Er no, the Battle of Britain took place in the Summer of 1940, the siege and bombing of Malta in 1942, although there a common link in that both times the Luftwaffe were defeated by Keith Park, surely the most unsung military genius of World War II

I know that Jakarta is, as I am, a big fan of "The Most Dangerous Enemy" by Stephen Bungay, and absolutely superb book about the BoB. Equally superb is, althought in a different style, is his "Alamein" which features a lot about Malta and the defence thereof which. Malta was an important base to disrupt the Allied supply lines and the appointment of Keith Park to organise it's air defence was arguably the nail in the coffin of the Afrika Korps.

All this probably nowt relevant to the original thread. Sully's comment "I think the answer is that all the men and women who died on the Allied side, regardless of creed or colour, were instrumental in the defeat of the axis and should be remembered for it" is, for me, the final word on the matter.

 

[northstandnorth]

All this probably nowt relevant to the original thread. Sully's comment "I think the answer is that all the men and women who died on the Allied side, regardless of creed or colour, were instrumental in the defeat of the axis and should be remembered for it" is, for me, the final word on the matter.

No it is very relevant and crucial to the reason I posted this thread.To counter the Muslims againt Crusades thread and to bring to the fore the forgotten(in a climate of anti muslim sentiment) contribution of India in both conflicts,my popy is worn to remember all the war dead,all sides all conflicts.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Italy were not trying to take Malta BEFORE the summer of 1940 as they didn't declare War until June 10th 1940! I have read Fortess Malta An Island Under Siege and that is clear.

Please don't attempt to rewrite History, the fact is that 1940 and the Battle of Britain was pivotal in the War.

Had we lost then Germany would have had a completely free hand in attacking Russia (they might well have won ) and America would have stayed neutral.

Malta and North Africa would have been an irrelevance

Tosh

Within hours of declaring war on the 10th of June bombs started falling on Malta. Malta did not get ALL the recognition it deserves by historians because to be frank England didn't think it would stand. They left it isolated with six Gloucester gladiators and expected it to fall. More bombs fell on Malta in THREE MONTHS than on London in the whole of the war.

I'd take Rommels and Monty's word over any historian and they knew how important N Africa was and even after the BOB Churchill badly needed victory in NA because morale was so low. You don't think he went to thank the troops there after we won El Alamein just on a whim! Hitler underestimated Malta and N Africa because he thought it was easy despite Rommel telling him they would lose the war without it. If Hitler was not so obsessed with the Eastern Front he would have supported Rommel in NAfrica and then Rommel and his troops would have had all the oil for the war and moved on to Britain. I suspect the BOB was a precursor to that to soften Britain up ready for when Rommel won.

There are lots of Pivotal battles in Ww2 and the BOB is just one. But against Malta or Stalingrad IMHO it's not as high, it gets hyped up because it's a great English victory but Malta and Stalingrad led to the Germans losing important battle troops.

Check out some of the films on the bombing of Malta it's better quality than some of the BOB film

 

[Chicken Runner61]

I know that Jakarta is, as I am, a big fan of "The Most Dangerous Enemy" by Stephen Bungay, and absolutely superb book about the BoB. Equally superb is, althought in a different style, is his "Alamein" which features a lot about Malta and the defence thereof which. Malta was an important base to disrupt the Allied supply lines and the appointment of Keith Park to organise it's air defence was arguably the nail in the coffin of the Afrika Korps.

All this probably nowt relevant to the original thread. Sully's comment "I think the answer is that all the men and women who died on the Allied side, regardless of creed or colour, were instrumental in the defeat of the axis and should be remembered for it" is, for me, the final word on the matter.

You are right about this - Malta was the equivelant of having an aircraft carrier in Mussolinis and Hitlers swimming pool!

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

i may be wrong but i recall reading a book about the paras and they had a lot of admiration for certain ss units. i think the book was called green eyed boys but as i said, i could be mistaken

french foreign legion gained a number of SS who enlisted after the war, fought in the Indo china conflict , dedicated to the cause.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Tosh

Within hours of declaring war on the 10th of June bombs started falling on Malta. Malta did not get ALL the recognition it deserves by historians because to be frank England didn't think it would stand. They left it isolated with six Gloucester gladiators and expected it to fall. More bombs fell on Malta in THREE MONTHS than on London in the whole of the war.

I'd take Rommels and Monty's word over any historian and they knew how important N Africa was and even after the BOB Churchill badly needed victory in NA because morale was so low. You don't think he went to thank the troops there after we won El Alamein just on a whim! Hitler underestimated Malta and N Africa because he thought it was easy despite Rommel telling him they would lose the war without it. If Hitler was not so obsessed with the Eastern Front he would have supported Rommel in NAfrica and then Rommel and his troops would have had all the oil for the war and moved on to Britain. I suspect the BOB was a precursor to that to soften Britain up ready for when Rommel won.

There are lots of Pivotal battles in Ww2 and the BOB is just one. But against Malta or Stalingrad IMHO it's not as high, it gets hyped up because it's a great English victory but Malta and Stalingrad led to the Germans losing important battle troops.

Check out some of the films on the bombing of Malta it's better quality than some of the BOB film

The Italians bottled it in North Africa which didn't help Rommels cause.

 

[Dandyman]

Hmm... why did we win the war?

Adolf Hitler

He made two of the most stupid and catastrophic tactical decisions in military history.

(1) He attacked a country that was (at the time) unconquerable... a country that at the time was his ally and had a massive inferiority complex to Germany. If he had finished off Europe first he could have taken his time over Russia with almost as many resources and land as the Russians had.
(2) He didnt try and knock Britain out of the war from the outset. Admittedly he was horribly advised by Goering over the Battle of Britain but the honest truth is if the German army had kept marching after Paris we would have been in much deeper trouble.

Anyone who watched the fantastic series on TV last year will know that France was won by the generals.... and then Hitler took over and proceeded to ignore them.

Hitler was Britains secret weapon.

By the way, dandyman, no mention of the Poles who fought for the nazis... I dont think it was only the Germanic Poles living in Wroclaw, Poznan etc.

There may have been some Kushabians (as fictionalised in "The Tin Drum") and there was both some collaboration and definite anti-Jewish action by the crypto-fascists of the Narodowe Siły Zbrojne (NSZ or "National Armed Forces") and the Police under the Central Government but in general I doubt that you would find many (ethnic) Poles who fought for the Nazis. In addition to 3 million Jewish Poles who perished in WW2, a further 3 million non-Jewish Poles also lost their lives amounting to a total of around 20% of the pre-war Polish population. A similar percentage in modern Britain would be around 12 million people.

 

[jakarta]

@%1;

Tosh

Within hours of declaring war on the 10th of June bombs started falling on Malta. Malta did not get ALL the recognition it deserves by historians because to be frank England didn't think it would stand. They left it isolated with six Gloucester gladiators and expected it to fall. More bombs fell on Malta in THREE MONTHS than on London in the whole of the war.

I'd take Rommels and Monty's word over any historian and they knew how important N Africa was and even after the BOB Churchill badly needed victory in NA because morale was so low. You don't think he went to thank the troops there after we won El Alamein just on a whim! Hitler underestimated Malta and N Africa because he thought it was easy despite Rommel telling him they would lose the war without it. If Hitler was not so obsessed with the Eastern Front he would have supported Rommel in NAfrica and then Rommel and his troops would have had all the oil for the war and moved on to Britain. I suspect the BOB was a precursor to that to soften Britain up ready for when Rommel won.

There are lots of Pivotal battles in Ww2 and the BOB is just one. But against Malta or Stalingrad IMHO it's not as high, it gets hyped up because it's a great English victory but Malta and Stalingrad led to the Germans losing important battle troops.

Check out some of the films on the bombing of Malta it's better quality than some of the BOB film

So the quality of films gets your vote?

Your previous post said that Hitler was extremely bothered by Malta and now you say he was more interested in the Eastern Front - try for some consistency please!

North Africa and the Middle East were never a strategical goal for the Germans - they got involved because the Italians f***ed up - perhaps I shouldn't say this but I HAVE read Mein Kampf - it is all pretty clear what Hitler was going to do once he was in power i.e. head out into Eastern Europe, he doesnt mention the Med/Malta/North Africa at all.

The fact is if Malta had fallen we would have had a longer and harder war, but if the Battle of Britain had been lost it would have been game over and we would be conducting this debate in German.

 

[Triggaaar]

We captured an FW 190 which was very useful as it could outfly a Spitfire but very few were made fortunately.

An FW190 outfly a Spitfire? Well that would depend on which mark of FW and which mark of Spit, and also in what type of fight. FWs never out-turned Spits, but when they came out they were faster and had a better roll rate. Spits were given bigger engines, had wings clipped etc, and they had different roles to play, so it's not straightforard to compare, but both were great fighters.

What "won" the war was the fact that Hitler was too stupid to invade Britain so the USA had somewhere to land their bombs and planes and men to attack Germany.

Germany was never close to being in a position to invade Britain. It had nothing to do with Hitler not trying.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

An FW190 outfly a Spitfire? Well that would depend on which mark of FW and which mark of Spit, and also in what tyoe of fight. FWs never out-turned Spits, but when they came out they were faster and had a better roll rate. Spits were given bigger engines, had wings clipped etc, and they had different roles to play, so it's not straightforard to compare, but both were great fighters.

Germany was never close to being in a position to invade Britain. It had nothing to do with Hitler not trying.

that's a load of tosh , think you'll find that they were more than capable of invading, the only problem was their supply chain would have been cut off by the Royal navy resulting in Defeat just short of London, this was proven when British and German officers after the war stagged a mock invasion plan

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

Jakarta - There is some stuff on wikipedia and norfolk-airfields websites re. RAF Sculthorpe, one of the many former airbases in my neck of the woods. You will see the references to Sculthorpe's closure in mid 1944 for upgrade to 'very heavy bomber' status. However the construction was not completed before 1946 and therefore after WWII. Worth reading the subsequent US / UK and other deployments at Sculthorpe, which was similar in scale to Fairford and Greenham Common.

Interesting to read about 'Operation Ju-Jitsu' which were secret recce flights from Sculthorpe over Russia during the Cold war by the RAF using planes disguised with USAF markings. Quite scary implications if the Russians had taken these as aggressive actions. Some suggestion this was a daring operation authorised by Churchill to impress the US. I guess this maybe well known to an enthusiast like you - but was news to me.

Although Sculthorpe fell out of official use more than 20 years ago it still dominates the landscape hereabouts and I can vouch for the twilight flights and low level drops by US C130s that were still taking place on recent summer evenings.

I know this has digressed somewhat from the original post but reflects views expressed by some on here that the Russians had a major part in the outcome of WWII and fears about their capabilities thereafter were influencing UK/US thinking even before D-Day.

 

[Triggaaar]

What "won" the war was the fact that Hitler was too stupid to invade Britain

that's a load of tosh

Right back at you.

think you'll find that they were more than capable of invading, the only problem was their supply chain would have been cut off by the Royal navy resulting in Defeat just short of London

Firstly, you are saying that if Hitler had tried to invade it would have failed (in your opinion, short of London), so you are agreeing with me that Don Quixote is wrong in his opinion that we won because Hitler was too stupid to invade.

Secondly, I can't imagine an invasion fleet doing too well while being bombed from the air and facing the biggest navy in the world. The allied invasion of Normandy showed how difficult it is to land troups even with air and naval superiority, Germany were in no position to make such an invasion of Britain.