"The Fall of Singapore—a Maritime Perspective" Topic
2 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please avoid recent politics on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Modern Naval Discussion (1946 to 2013) Message Board Back to the WWII Naval Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestWorld War Two at Sea Modern
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Workbench ArticleUseful 3D models for concrete barriers.
Featured Profile ArticleFor the time being, the last in our series of articles on the gates of Old Jerusalem.
Current Poll
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango01 | 15 Feb 2017 9:37 p.m. PST |
"The fall of Singapore reflects failure at many levels, but not in the way most observers think. The British had to fight the war they got in 1939, rather than a war that was yet to happen in 1941. Had the Japanese attacked in the Far East before the Germans attacked Poland, the British would have sent their forces east, however reluctantly. But that wasn't the order of events. The greatest naval defeat the British suffered in World War Two wasn't the destruction of the Prince of Wales and Repulse in the South China Sea in December 1941, but the fall of France in June 1940. By removing the French fleet from the Allied order of battle, bringing Italy into the conflict with its substantial naval strength, thus making the Mediterranean a theatre of war, and opening the French Atlantic ports to German U-Boats and surface raiders, France's defeat made the load on British global naval strength more than could be borne. Britain's strategic over-extension finally hit home. The ‘Main Fleet to Singapore' policy was a much more credible strategy than hindsight has allowed. Admittedly, there were deficiencies. The British build-up of forces and facilities was too slow, hindered by a combination of financial constraints and well-meant efforts at disarmament. Not enough was done to develop the land and air forces necessary for what would have always been a conflict fought both at sea and on land, notably in Malaya. The Dominions' support, particularly in fighting forces, never matched the promises made at the 1923 Imperial Defence Conference…" Main page link Amicalement Armand
|
emckinney | 16 Feb 2017 6:27 p.m. PST |
The absolutely terrible RN aircraft wouldn't have helped, either. |
|