Question for WWII buffs

Is it true Hitler didn't invade Switzerland because the populace had guns?

Not just true but very very true. It was about the only place he feared to tread on. Still to this day the same holds true and at the age of 16 as I have heard your handed a rifle and ammo and you have to shoot X number of round so you can prove you can shoot. By the way last I heard that was 16 if male

Actually Hitler made an agreement with them he needed a place to store ilgotten gains and hid private home was up there somewhere.
They signed a non-aggression compact. Lots of Nazis moved though there to get to the Vatican in Italy and then on to south America where the laws against them non to existent.
It's a hard thing to follow but when they thought that they could in trouble a lot of top guys started looking for ways out.
Walt
Ps I'm getting a tiny bit better was able sit up a lot today hope it keeps up.

Why Didn’t Hitler Invade Switzerland?

Posted on April 11, 2012


A comment on yesterday’s post got me thinking about this. Hitler even had plans (Operation Tannenbaum) to invade Switzerland sitting in his desk drawer. Why didn’t Hitler invade Switzerland? Books could be written about this. Heck, there probably already have been. I did a bit of research and tried to grossly oversimplify things to post a bit about it here.

Switzerland impressively mobilized its army reserves and civilians. They were well prepared, increasing food production, developing communication networks, etc. More or less, they did everything they could to avoid an invasion. In addition to the devastation wrought by war, the Swiss (who’d had a functioning democracy for over 500 years) were terrified of losing their independence.

The Swiss population was overwhelmingly opposed to Nazism. They were, however, in a difficult position. Switzerland is a country with no natural resources; it was surrounded by fascist powers, the Axis countries.

Switzerland tried to avoid antagonizing Germany by making it difficult for the Jewish refugees to enter Switzerland. In 1938, they imposed a special visa requirement for “German non-Aryans” and expanding the visa requirement to all foreign nationals (including Jews fleeing from other countries) the next year. They closed their border crossings and criminally prosecuted those who sheltered Jews hiding from Nazis.

With Hitler’s rise, the Swiss feared a German invasion and tweaked the National Redoubt (the Swiss national defense plan). They installed defenses (like the Toblerone line) that were intended to slow down an invasion enough to allow it the military and government enough time to withdraw into the easier-to-defend alpine areas. Switzerland built oodles of forts (most camouflaged like Fürigen)in the center of the country (we’re hoping to visit more of them).

Essentially, Switzerland was prepared to cede some terrain to Germany in hopes of retaining more easily defendable areas. Sorry Geneva, you would have been left to the Nazis. You might have still been able to take part in guerrilla campaign. Hitler would have had to devote significant forces to conquering and holding the area (and experience huge losses). Switzerland hoped to deter an invasion by demonstrating that an invasion would have a high cost.

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? Germany was able to use Switzerland’s train lines to Italy during WWII. We’ve all heard about the sealed rail cars that passed unchecked through Switzerland from Italy to Germany. The Swiss rigged every bridge through the mountains with a incendiary devices, destroying the valued Swiss supply lines. Switzerland also made economic concessions to Germany. They hoped Germany would do a cost benefit analysis and decide that it wasn’t worth it.

Switzerland conducted a delicate and escalating dance with Nazi Germany. For example, Germany continually violated Swiss airspace. Germany threatened the Swiss after they shot down 11 Luftwaffe planes (that were flying over Switzerland). The Swiss army ordered this stop, they forced the planes to land at Swiss airfields instead. Hitler (unsuccessfully) sent saboteurs to destroy the pesky airfields. Relations on a personal level (with bankers) were a little less tense.

In the end, Switzerland may have just gotten lucky that Hitler got busy fighting a war on two fronts (eastern and western fronts).


Here is the link:
http://schwingeninswitzerland.wordpress.com/2012/04/11/why-didnt-hitler-invade-switzerland/

Greg is correct, it was a combination of economic and militia defenses.

"Germany was able to use Switzerland’s train lines to Italy during WWII. We’ve all heard about the sealed rail cars that passed unchecked through Switzerland from Italy to Germany." This has been given as a reason for the 'accidental' bombing of Schaffhausen (Switzerland) by the US 8th air force. If it is true or not, I do not know.

The Swiss installed literally thousands of fortifications in some of the roughest terrain in Europe where the panzers and planes would do the germans no good. The German high command knew they would suffer high casulties for littel gain, besides, if they had of actually won the war then all of Europe would be under their effective control anyway.

Pretty much the same reason Hitler didn't invade Spain even if they refused to allow German troops in to attack Gibraltar. Spain being nuetral had ships docking there that were transporting food and other items critical to Hitlers war effort. They then shipped those goods to Germany via train. Hitler has buying agents in South America buying meat and other things they needed. We actually had people doing much the same with the intent of making Germany pay much more for those good. Most of the stuff we purchased there was sent to England to help feed the civilian population. Had Spain allowed Hitler in we wold have been able to shut off most shipments because Spain would have no longer been nuetral.

Basically the Swiss avoided invaision by kissing Hilters rump.

Rick

There was no strategic reason to invade Switzerland, and it is a tough nut to crack. Not just its famous citizen army, but it is a mountainous country that's much easier to defend than it is to invade. Being neutral, Switzerland wasn't a threat. But probably just as important, you have to remember why Germany invaded the countries it did: Payback for the humiliation it had suffered in the first World War at the hands of France, England and Russia. Switzerland wasn't a belligerent in the Great War. Of course, if things had gone differently and Germany had defeated Britain and the Soviet Union, there's no reason to think it wouldn't have eventually gotten around to invading Switzerland. Unfortunately for Germany and fortunately for the Swiss, Hitler bit off more than he could chew when he decided to take on the Russians.

Hitler didn't hesitate to attack Russia, and they had a huge standing Army with guns. Hitler attacked the Finns who were armed to the teeth. Hitler didn't hesitate to attack a long list of other well armed countries. Had the Swiss posed some sort of threat, Hitler wouldn't have thought twice about attacking them. After all, he wasn't the one staring down a gun barrel. He was safe and sound while his troops were doing the fighting and dying. He thought himself to be invincible. Swiss banks held millions of dollars of stolen wealth for Hitlers henchmen.

The fact that Switzerland had a lot of guns sounds like something you'd find in a pro 2nd ammendment argument somewhere.
And a poor argument at that.
It's equivalent to some folks saying that the Japanese didn't invade the west coast of the US because so many Americans had guns.
Both are completely false and show a lack of understanding of the history, strategy, tactics and logistics of war.
In a nut shell, Switzerland was not invaded because it had no natural resources to take and no strategic value.

The Swiss had a very elaborate defensive plan that included destroying most of the industrial capacity of the country, blowing up railroad bridges and tunnels ending rail traffic through the Alps and retreating to the Mountains where the Nazis would spend years trying to drive them out. Basically the risks where greater than any possible gain. When the war was going well for the Nazis The Swiss made it so they had more to loose by invasion, by the time the war turned the Nazis had a lot more pressing issues (holding what they all ready conquered) than taking Switzerland. Swiss actions during WWII should be studied as a model on how to avert participation in War.

didn't th Swiss declare neutrality? Swiss industry did supply the Germans with ball bearings ect.

Until you consider how hard the militia would have made it for the Germans to invade and keep Switzerland and how easy the Germans invaded and kept Denmark (Berlin fell before Denmark was liberated).

The average US Hunter with a high powered rifle in WWII was just as well armed as a Japanese infantryman was with the 7.7 MM they used.Ever used one? They only hold 5 bullets and are not very handy.A couple million US citizens lining the West Coast shooting at a few thousand Japanese invading forces would have wiped them out.The Chinese proved that numbers can overrun superior weapons
in Korea.

No time to respond right now and this thread will probably go poof before I can, but Ditto on what most others said -

Germany was not scared of civilians with guns, just as the Japanese were not afraid of civilians with guns.

Since we are talking about wwII I got this in an email thought it was interesting it is a whole bunch of pictures of the war
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/pages/ww2/

Civilians with guns were called the Resistance in European countries that had been invaded by the Germans and played a major role in defeating the Germans.Any military tactics manual will tell you its very difficult to occupy an area where the population is actively working against the invaders.Look at Iraq and Afghanistan our soliders were/are getting beat up/bombed/shot all the time by the locals.Russians were defeated by the civilians in Afghanistan.
and Oh don't forget the buch of rag tag civilians that beat a superior invading force back in the late 1700's in North America

It is an annoyance to a military power, not a deterrent.

A citizen with a gun and willing to confront invaders is alot more of a deterrent than a bunch of unarmed whoosies sitting around wringing their hands and being cowards.

If one takes a real hard look at the resistance in several countries you will find that thier biggest contribution was keeping forces tied down. Greece is a prime example. They kept 6 German divisions tied down. 6 divisions that could have made a difference in many of the different battles in Russia or perhaps in Italy or at Normandy. I've never bothered to total the numbers but they were tied down in the "low countries", France, Norway and even in occupied Russia.

As far as Hitler following the dictates of tactics, well lets just say he wasn't real good at it. At the time he ordered the invasion of Russia all rail traffic had to go through Moscow. The rail system resembled the spokes on a wheel with Moscow as the hub. Take Moscow and resupply to the rest of the Russian front became impossible. Add in that in the opening days of the invasion most of Stalins professional officer corp was in "re-education" camps or had been shot in the purges, replaced by political hacks. It was only after Stalin realized his error that many were reinstated and the Russian Army started to hold it's own. So Hitlers demand of a broad front in Russia, plus his obsession with taking Stalingrad and wasting an entire Army there where not the marks of a tactical genius.

Japan never got around to attacking the west coast because they did not want to leave any type of support in rear areas. When they failed to take Midway they lost the initiative and by the time we secured Guadalcanal their ability to launch any major invasion was none. Plus at the time they would have to have taken Hawaii too.

Yamamoto did warn against an invasion and made the "gun" comment.

China did prove that amss assualt against the Japanese could work. The US military prove it to be defeated in Korea.

Rick

Rick

How do you think Tito in Yugoslavia drove out the Nazis? They were the only Communist nation that was not "liberated" by the Soviets.

Is that how you would describe Afghanistan right now?

Japan did not have the means to attack and invade the West Coast. It was a huge undertaking for them to mount a 2 hour and 5 minute raid on Pearl Harbor.

The ability to project power over great distances (especially over oceans) is a massive undertaking. That is why the Argentines thought they were safe taking the Falklands in the 1980s from the British, and that's why they are probably safe if they do it again in the next year or two.

Germany couldn't do it in North Africa, Japan couldn't even do it to Midway.

Agreed

(quoted from post at 07:38:42 01/16/13) Civilians with guns were called the Resistance in European countries that had been invaded by the Germans and played a major role in defeating the Germans.Any military tactics manual will tell you its very difficult to occupy an area where the population is actively working against the invaders.Look at Iraq and Afghanistan our soliders were/are getting beat up/bombed/shot all the time by the locals.Russians were defeated by the civilians in Afghanistan.
and Oh don't forget the bunch of rag tag civilians that beat a superior invading force back in the late 1700's in North America

Click to expand...

That "rag tag" bunch of civilians had a LOT of help from the French military, especially their navy. You may want to deny it, but we'd have been a colony a lot longer had the French not come to our aid - twice. The British came back 30 years later a burned our capitol, remember? Had they not been engaged in other parts of the world, they probably would have retaken us and our civilians with guns.

Civilians with weapons have seldom done much more than annoy invading armies. They tend to cause the invaders to kill off large numbers of the native population in an attempt to "weed out" the insurgents or in retaliation.

The fact that the Swiss populace was well armed was influential but certainly not dispositive.

Dean

Agreed. Look at France and look at Yugoslavia in WW2. Most of the French sat around and accepted the Nazi rule as their lot in life. Parts of Yugoslavia were never controlled by the Nazis and only the most northern section of the country was "liberated" by the Red Army in late 1944 - the local partisan forces drove the Germans from the rest of the country.

All of Afghanistan has never been controlled by the US or the "US freindly" government. Large swaths of the "conquered" Soviet Union were never completely controlled by the Nazis either. Whole swaths of Belarus were never held by the Nazis.

Belgium and the Netherlands also declared neutrality, but the Germans ignored that.

One of the primary reasons Germany didn"t invade Switzerland was that it was more useful to them because it allowed them access to the world money market, gave the Nazi elite a place to hide their stolen wealth ( were do you think all the gold teeth from the camps ended up and provided a means to obtain value and necessary goods.

It is also true that invading Switzerland would be a blood bath given the hidden bunkers, artillary and near universal military training and organization to repell an invasion.

Russia had oil and coal reserves

Did an armed civilian population keep us out of Afganistan?

Good post dhermesc.
I am surprised at how many people just do not understand logistics.
It was a physical impossibility for the Japanese to attack the west coast of the US.
We had a couple thousand ships assigned to the task of invading and supporting our landing on Okinawa. The Japanese didn't have the ships and crews and materiel to even think of such a venture. Not even close.

Hitler did not attack the Finns, they allied themselves with Hitler in order to gain back the land Russia took from them in the Russo-Finnish war.

It appears to be pushing the US out of Afghanistan.

We're not being pushed out by a couple Taliban with AKs. We're getting out overdue from a war that has lasted longer than any other military event we've been involved in.

You ask the average soldier what he or she most fears in Afghanistan. It's NOT the AK47. It's the IED. Booby traps, not guns.

Our big problem in Astan is lack of enough boots on the ground. One young guy I know showed me on a map the area his division was covering. By all rights to cover that area they need about 3 1/2 to 4 division. And really the area isn't that big. To really cove all of Astan would require 20-25 divisions. The active duty Army is 10 divisions.

Active Divisions
1st Armored Division, Fort Bliss, Texas
1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, Texas
1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kansas
2nd Infantry Division, Camp Casey, South Korea
3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart, Georgia
4th Infantry Division, Fort Carson, Colorado
10th Mountain Division, Fort Drum, New York
25th Infantry Division, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii
82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, North Carolina
101st Airborne Division, Fort Campbell, Kentucky

Each Mech Infantry and Armor division is over 20,000 people but only about 8,000 are combat jobs, the rest are support. 8.000 men don't cover a very large area when you consider 24 hr ops and part of those guys are going to be refitting or on reaction force.

So now we have to relye on unreliable "allies" to contol the bulk of Astan.

So under current guidlines set by congress about the size of the military we can't win this one. It's not the hearts and minds of our service men and women, it's the lack of man power and unwillingness of the tax payer to fund a larger military while trying to get the national budget under control and pay the deficit.

Rick

Oldtanker is telling it right. Hitler started out using his generals advice and did fine. At some point Hitler decided HE was a general with an understanding of the complexities of war and that's when he fell on his face. Stalin did the same thing. Mussolini just completely misread everything from the start. In all the Japanese probably had the most realistic plans, but they simply grabbed too much. If Hitler had simply moved west and fought Britain to a stalemate, most of Europe would be speaking German today and we never would have had a Cold War. His ego is what killed him. Not that that was a bad thing mind you!

The armed Swiss citizens are as much of a deterrent as the terrain. No one dismisses an armed populace, difficult terrain or difficult logistical situations. Well, the US does, but you do what you gotta do.

There likely would have still been a cold war but with Germany instead of the USSR. I had no problem with the Afghanistan campaign initially but when the focus of the mission got fuzzy then it is time to clear out. Vietnam is testament to the insanity of a military conflict without clear defined achievable goals, and the mindset to win.