100%. The British army, at the time, was good for little more than putting down colonial rebellions against vastly inferiors foes.
Tbf to them though, at the time, no one had any reason to expect hundreds of mobile artillery fortresses, driven by methed out nazis, to appear 50 miles behind them.
It was more about resources. The allies were basically the rest of the world between the British, French, and Dutch empires. Japan did more to disrupt that than Germany did, and Germany was eventually knocked out of the Naval war, which left Britain free to import as much as they needed from those combined empires. And the Nazis were running out of fuel, which is why they invaded USSR.
WWII ended up being a war of attrition just like WWI was, the main difference was that Germany was able to take a lot more territory before their lack of resources caught up with them.
Eventually, but it took a lot of trial and error to get that far. Very few Allied commanders who started the war managed to finish it.
100%. The British army, at the time, was good for little more than putting down colonial rebellions against vastly inferiors foes.
Tbf to them though, at the time, no one had any reason to expect hundreds of mobile artillery fortresses, driven by methed out nazis, to appear 50 miles behind them.
I guess you could say the Allied forces won the war because their command structure was better at replacement than the Axis
It was more about resources. The allies were basically the rest of the world between the British, French, and Dutch empires. Japan did more to disrupt that than Germany did, and Germany was eventually knocked out of the Naval war, which left Britain free to import as much as they needed from those combined empires. And the Nazis were running out of fuel, which is why they invaded USSR.
WWII ended up being a war of attrition just like WWI was, the main difference was that Germany was able to take a lot more territory before their lack of resources caught up with them.