Military Review

"Teachings on the Weser." How Hitler captured Denmark and Norway

80
"Teachings on the Weser." How Hitler captured Denmark and Norway
German anti-aircraft gunner covers troops participating in the Wehrmacht invasion of Denmark in April 1940


80 years ago, on April 9, 1940, the German invasion of Denmark and Norway began (Danish-Norwegian operation, or Operation Weserubung; “Teachings on Weser” or “Weser Maneuvers”). The Wehrmacht occupied Denmark and Norway, strengthening the strategic position of the Third Reich in Northern Europe.

General situation


After the defeat and occupation of Poland, the Third Reich began preparations for an invasion of the West. Hitler was not going to repeat the mistakes of the Kaiser. Before the war with Russia, he was going to defeat France and England, to take revenge on the French. England and France at that time pursued a “strange war” policy, abandoning active operations against Germany, although its military and economic potential was relatively weak and the Allies had good chances to defeat the Germans. London and Paris still hoped that Hitler would go to war with the Russians first.

As a result, the situation was favorable for Germany. The Reich leadership received time to prepare a new aggression and choose the beginning of a new offensive. The strategic initiative by the Anglo-French leadership was calmly transferred to Hitler. Already in late September - early October 1939, Hitler ordered the preparation of an offensive against France to be included in the Netherlands and Belgium in the combat zone. The Führer formulated the goal of the war: "Bring England to its knees, defeat France."

The stake in the war was on massive use tanks и aviation. To lightning war. The Reich could not wage a protracted war, as it had a limited raw material and food base. Moreover, the war in the West was only a stage in the development of world aggression. On November 23, 1939, speaking at a meeting with the military leadership, Hitler noted: "We can only oppose Russia after we are free in the West." Concentration and deployment of troops in the western strategic direction begins.


The assault group of German sailors on board the destroyer before landing in Denmark


German sentries and tanks Pz.Kpfw. I Ausf. B at the entrance to the Jørgensens Hotel in Horsens


Danish children play on the German tank Pz.Kpfw. I Ausf.B, standing on the highway north of Haderslev


Danish sailors and German military on Copenhagen street

Target - Northern Europe


In preparation for the offensive on the French front, the armed forces of the Reich initially carried out an invasion of Denmark and Norway. Starting the war against militarily weak states, the military and political leadership of the Reich sought to solve several important problems. Scandinavia was an important military base. Berlin had to get ahead of England and France, who were planning to land troops in Scandinavia during the Soviet-Finnish war. After the defeat of Finland, the Anglo-French military-political leadership did not abandon plans to use the strategic points of Scandinavia. That is, Hitler wanted to get ahead of the Anglo-French forces.

The capture of Denmark and Norway blocked the sea passage to the Baltic for England. The capture of these two countries brought the German armed forces, primarily the fleet and the Air Force, to a flanking position in relation to the British Isles. Now, German ships and aircraft received good conditions for striking important sea lanes in the North Atlantic. The Reich received important ports and airfields, a strategic bridgehead for pressure on England and a future war with Russia. The Norwegian bridgehead could be used to attack the Soviet Arctic and block the sea routes in the Barents Sea. Germany also provided itself with important types of strategic raw materials, strengthening its military-economic potential.

In addition, it was important for Berlin by fighting in northern Europe to distract the Anglo-French command from the impending offensive in France, Belgium and Holland.


A group of Wehrmacht soldiers walking along the street of the Danish town of Lindholm


The parade of German troops in Copenhagen on the occasion of the birthday of Adolf Hitler. April 20, 1940

"Teachings on the Weser"


The development of the operation began in January 1940. In February, the headquarters of the 21st Corps under the command of General Nikolaus von Falkenhorst began a detailed study of the operation. It was Falkenhorst who carried out the Danish-Norwegian operation. The directive on the operation against Denmark and Norway was signed on March 1, 1940. It received the code name "Weserubung" (German: Fall Weserübung), "Teachings on the Weser" (Weser is a river in Germany, flowing northward and flowing into the North Sea). In order to achieve surprise, the attack on Denmark and Norway was simultaneous with the widespread use of naval and airborne assault forces. At a military meeting on April 2, Hitler appointed the day the invasion began - April 9.

Limited forces were allocated for the operation — 9 divisions and a brigade. They united in 21 army groups. The 21st Falkenhorst Corps operated in Germany, the 31st Corps of General Kaupish in Denmark. The German high command could not weaken the forces in the main western direction. Almost all forces of the German military and trade were to participate in the operation fleet: about 100 combat and transport ships, 35 submarines. The 10th Air Corps also participated in the operation: 500 combat and 300 transport aircraft. Aviation transported paratroopers and infantry, supported the fleet and ground units in Denmark and Norway.


The emphasis was on the surprise attack, the weakness of the Danish and Norwegian forces and the widespread use of the "fifth column", especially in Norway, where the Nazis were strong, led by Quisling. Denmark had only 2 divisions of incomplete composition, about 90 aircraft and a small fleet: 2 coastal defense battleships, 9 minesweepers, 3 mine loaders, 6 destroyers, 7 submarines. Norway had 6 small divisions, after partial mobilization they were brought up to 55 thousand people, the Air Force - 190 aircraft, the weak Navy - 2 coastal defense battleships, about 30 destroyers, 8 minesweepers, 10 mine loaders, 9 submarines.

In preparing the operation, the German command attached decisive importance to the factor of surprise. This was due to the fact that the lightning seizure of Denmark and the success of the landing and consolidation of amphibious assault forces at numerous points on the coast of Norway in the conditions of the complete superiority of the British fleet at sea could only be achieved if action was sudden. If the German ships and transports en route to Norway were intercepted by the British, who had overwhelming superiority at sea, the fate of the German Navy and the entire operation would not be decided in favor of the Reich. The risk was enormous.

The preparation for the operation was surrounded by strict secrecy. Hitler's commander E. Manstein noted: “None of the strangers knew anything about the plan for the occupation of Norway.” All events were to be unexpected for the northern states and western opponents. Preparations for loading onto transports were kept in secret, commanders and troops were given false destinations. The troops learned about the true destination only after going to sea. Vessels left the places of loading in small groups and with such a time difference that the landing, despite the different distances to their destinations in Norway, happened everywhere simultaneously. That is, everywhere the Germans had to attack suddenly. All military transports disguised as merchant ships.

In order to break the resistance of Copenhagen and Oslo, the Reich leadership gave the operation the appearance of a "peaceful invasion." False assurances were sent to the governments of Denmark and Norway that Germany wants to render the Scandinavian countries armed defense of their neutrality. The Danish and Norwegian governments had some information about the growing threat of a German invasion, but did not give them much attention. Countries were not ready for an enemy invasion. A few days before the start of the war, the Danish envoy in Berlin informed Danish Foreign Minister Munch about this. However, the Danish government believed that in the context of the war with England and France it was not profitable for Germany to start a war in Scandinavia. It was also considered in Norway. As a result, no early action was taken to repel the attack. Denmark and Norway were not ready to repel the aggression of a very limited group of the Wehrmacht. The British and French also missed the start of the operation. German ships and transports calmly reached the landing sites.


Soldiers and officers of the 138th Wehrmacht mountain ranger regiment in the port before loading onto the destroyer. The picture was taken before the landing of German troops in Norway


Transport carrier U-52, delivering reinforcements to units of the Wehrmacht in Norway, is landing


Wehrmacht motorized column moves on a road in Norway


Damaged German Neubaufahrzeug multi-tower tank of the 40th Special Purpose Tank Battalion on the road in the Ringsaker area

The capture of Denmark and Norway


The Germans made extensive use of subversive and sabotage operations. So, when attacking Denmark, the Abwehr (military intelligence and counterintelligence) on April 9, 1940 conducted the operation "Sanssouci". German saboteurs penetrated the Danish border and captured a strategic target - a bridge across the Small Belt Strait. On the eve of the invasion of Norway, several German reconnaissance and sabotage units occupied important points on the coast and thereby ensured the landing of the main landing forces. At the same time, the "fifth column" carried out subversive actions in the country.

At dawn on April 9, 1940, the Wehrmacht invaded Denmark without declaring war. Only two divisions and a brigade took part in the attack. Small naval landings were landed. The Nazis did not meet resistance. Denmark lay under Hitler. The authorities themselves asked the population to refrain from any resistance to the Germans. The scale of the "hostilities" is evidenced by the fact that during the capture of Denmark, German troops lost 2 people and 10 wounded. Losses of the Danes - 13 people. It was an easy walk for the Wehrmacht. The Danish leadership de facto surrendered the country to the Nazis. Already on the evening of April 9, the Nazis were free to use communications, airfields and ports of Denmark for operations in Norway.

On April 9, the operation began in Norway. Ships and transports with landing parties left on April 3. The sudden landings of naval and airborne assault forces, the activity of the Quislingers broke the resistance of the Norwegian armed forces. The Germans very easily occupied the key port of Narvik. In the morning, a German landing force led by the destroyer Wilhelm Heidkamp entered the port, drowned the Norwegian armored carriers of the coast guard Eidswold and Norge. Then the German mountain shooters forced the Norwegian garrison to lay down weapon. The second German detachment, led by the heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper, successfully captured Trondheim. The third detachment captured Bergen. Stavanger was captured by paratroopers, which were reinforced by airborne infantrymen and anti-aircraft gunners. Soon infantry arrived at the ports. In the same way, the German Air Force, navy and infantry captured other cities and important points.

As a result, on the first day of the operation, German troops captured a number of important ports and cities, including the Norwegian capital Oslo. On this day, the German fleet suffered the greatest loss - when trying to break through to the Norwegian capital through the Oslo fiord, the heavy cruiser Blucher was sunk by artillery fire and torpedoes (125 crew members and 122 landing party members died). In the same battle, the German heavy cruiser Lutts was damaged. The Norwegian government did not capitulate. Separate units of the Norwegian troops, using a rugged terrain, offered stubborn resistance. There was a threat of prolonged hostilities and the arrival of allies to help the Norwegians. However, the resistance of the Norwegians was helped to break the local “fifth column” and the extremely sluggish and indecisive actions of the Anglo-French command, who was slow in providing real assistance to Norway.


German airborne landing in the Norwegian city of Narvik


Wehrmacht mountain huntsmen (3rd mountain division) are transported by inflatable boats through a mountain lake near Narvik


Blucher drowning in the Oslo Fjord, April 9, 1940

In fact, London and Paris only imitated Norway's help. She passed it, as before Poland. Soon they will also surrender France. The ruling circles of the “Western democracies” deliberately surrendered to Hitler most of Europe. They showed him that there would be no "second front". That the Germans can calmly end the Russians. Therefore, the British fleet "overslept" the movement of German naval landings. And then the allies did everything to provide “effective assistance” to Norway.

True, the British showed superiority at sea - on April 10 and 13 they defeated the German Navy in the area of ​​Narvik. Thus, the British cut off the units of two German mountain infantry divisions located in Narvik, so the Germans were not able to develop an offensive in the north of the country at the beginning of the operation. By April 20, 1940, the Nazis occupied most of southern Norway. At the same time, some cities where the Norwegian units resisted were subjected to strong air strikes.

In mid-April, the Anglo-French command sent to Norway up to four divisions (English, French and Polish units). However, their attempts to develop together with the remaining Norwegian forces the offensive in central Norway ended in collapse. Unlucky allies acted in Northern Norway. So, in mid-April, the Allies launched an attack on Narvik, but they were only able to take it on May 28, and this could not change the general situation. The Allies acted inconsistently, mediocre, indecisively and slowly. British intelligence made one mistake after another.

The battle for Norway lasted about two months. The final outcome of the Norwegian campaign was predetermined by the Wehrmacht offensive at the French Theater. Anglo-French troops began to lose in the Netherlands, Belgium and France. On June 6-10, 1940, the Allies were evacuated from Norway in the Narvik area. The royal family, King Haakon VII, and the Norwegian government were evacuated from Tromsø on June 7th. On June 8, 1940, the German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sank the English aircraft carrier Glories and its escort (destroyers Akast and Ardent) in the Norwegian Sea. Killed over 1500 English sailors. The remnants of the Norwegian troops, left without the support of the allies, capitulated on 10 June. The Nazis occupied all of Norway.

The Germans seized a strategic bridgehead in Northern Europe, secured themselves from the north. Germany has strengthened its military-economic potential. The victory in Norway went to the Wehrmacht at a relatively low cost: 1317 people were killed, 1604 wounded, missing - 2375. 127 aircraft, about 30 ships and ships were lost. The Norwegian army lost 1335 people killed and missing, up to 60 thousand prisoners; the British - 4400 people, the French and Poles - 530 killed.


German battle cruiser Gneisenau anchored in the Norwegian fjord


Trucks with British soldiers on the street of a Norwegian village


The skeletons of the destroyed German supply vessels in the harbor of Narvik after the attack of the British 2nd destroyer flotilla on April 13, 1940


German cyclist soldiers after landing at the port of Oslo


Captured Norwegian soldiers by the road in Kwam, surrounded by Wehrmacht mountain rangers
Author:
Photos used:
http://waralbum.ru/
80 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 April 9 2020 05: 35 New
    +8
    The Danish leadership de facto surrendered the country to the Nazis.
    Judging by the photo of German soldiers with Danish sailors, everything was de facto surrendered to the country, in concert.
    And here’s another episode of that war when the eight Bf.110 of I / ZG-76, led by Lieutenant Hansen, captured the Norwegian airfield, making an emergency landing on it and dispersing the Norwegian armed guard with the fire of the airborne shooters ...
    1. Aleksandr72
      Aleksandr72 April 9 2020 05: 59 New
      +9
      Yeah, yeah. The Vikings became smaller by the 9th century. And the Danes themselves even shot a film in which they heroically resist the German invasion - April 23th ​​- the story of how Danish cyclists fought with German motorized infantry. It is even surprising that de facto the Germans had such small losses and judging by the film, all these losses to the Nazis were inflicted by a single Danish bicycle platoon. For me, this film was interesting in that it shows the uniform, equipment and weapons (mostly light rifle) of the Danish army during that war. I was always amused by the Danish helmet (steel helmet) M23 (M40 / XNUMX) - it’s necessary to come up with such a design:

      And this is a shot from the movie "April 9" with the very Danish scooters:
      1. svp67
        svp67 April 9 2020 06: 33 New
        10
        Quote: Aleksandr72
        It is even surprising that de facto the Germans had such small losses and judging by the film, all these losses to the Nazis were inflicted by a single Danish bicycle platoon.

        And then it happened by chance, they didn’t want ... it’s like that itself ...
      2. Pane Kohanku
        Pane Kohanku April 9 2020 15: 44 New
        +3
        I was always amused by the Danish helmet (steel helmet) M23 (M23 / 40) - well, you need to come up with such a design

        outwardly similar to the post-war helmet of the army of the GDR. Which, by the way, was developed for the Wehrmacht - it simply did not have time to put into production. hi
        1. Mihaylov
          Mihaylov April 9 2020 16: 31 New
          +1
          Quote: Pan Kohanku
          I was always amused by the Danish helmet (steel helmet) M23 (M23 / 40) - well, you need to come up with such a design

          outwardly similar to the post-war helmet of the army of the GDR. Which, by the way, was developed for the Wehrmacht - it simply did not have time to put into production. hi

          Good afternoon, Nikolai was somehow interested in this issue, but most likely this is a beautiful legend, at least so far no one has brought any evidence of the origin of the GDR helmet from WWII developments.
          1. Pane Kohanku
            Pane Kohanku April 9 2020 16: 35 New
            +1
            so far no one has brought any evidence of the origin of the GDR helmet from WWII developments.

            Hello Sergey! I read somewhere .... Where - I do not remember. I'll try to flip through Shunkov in the evening, "Soldiers of Destruction" - perhaps I took it from there. drinks
            1. Mihaylov
              Mihaylov April 9 2020 16: 41 New
              +2
              Nikolay, you’re right, this version is very widespread and I also thought for a long time, but when I became more interested in this issue, it turned out that there was no evidence at all, that is, no documents, sometimes only some murky photographs, like the Germans in 1945 in experimental helmets (future GDRs), but if you look closely, then most likely there is the same Danish M23, which was taken out of the warehouses as necessary
              1. Pane Kohanku
                Pane Kohanku April 9 2020 16: 48 New
                +2
                then there most likely the same Danish M23, which was taken out of warehouses as necessary

                ... like Danish rifles with almost no cartridges that were handed out to military pensioners and Volkssturm schoolchildren ... what you are probably right. I will not argue. hi
      3. Alf
        Alf April 9 2020 19: 34 New
        +1
        Quote: Aleksandr72
        I've always been amused

        And the most interesting thing is how in the Danish army the officers turned to the privates by number. Not "Private Swisson," but "Number Twenty-Three."
    2. Basil50
      Basil50 April 9 2020 06: 06 New
      +7
      But today, the Poles find so much heroism that the Danes, Norwegians, French, and British are in * resistance * to the Nazis. In search of * heroism * the Americans joined them. The farther the larger and more heroic they find.
      At the same time, in Nazi England, Nazi criminals were hidden more than in South America.
      1. svp67
        svp67 April 9 2020 06: 38 New
        10
        Quote: Vasily50
        But today, the Poles find so much heroism that the Danes, Norwegians, French, and British are in * resistance * to the Nazis.

        Yes, somehow forgetting that the same Danish-Norwegians were full of SS divisions “Viking” and “Nord”
  2. Olgovich
    Olgovich April 9 2020 06: 29 New
    +7
    London and Paris still hoped that Hitler would go to war with the Russians first.

    for this they didn’t have to declare war on Hitler in September 1939, for no one would leave behind a strong enemy behind, attacking another strong enemy, the USSR.

    But they announced and could not count on Hitler’s campaign in the East.

    They hoped for something else - that Hitler would finally "get drunk" and that Austria, Czechoslovakia, and finally fed enough, would be enough for him. Of Poland.

    And the reason for the “strangeness” of the war was that they categorically did NOT want to fight, fearing losses and hardships.

    The stupidest hopes and the stupidest ostrich policy of appeasing the aggressor ....
    1. svp67
      svp67 April 9 2020 06: 40 New
      +5
      Quote: Olgovich
      But they announced and could not count on Hitler’s campaign in the East.

      In this case, they were let down by the fact that Churchill came to power, who at that moment did not love the Germans more than the Russians ...
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 9 2020 10: 46 New
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        In this case, they were let down by the fact that Churchill came to power, who at that moment did not love the Germans more than the Russians ...

        Vinnie came to power after the defeat in Norway, in May 1940. And the war on Germany was declared under the “peacemaker” Chamberlain. He really didn’t want to fight - but only because he considered Britain unprepared for war and he took all the time to create normal armed forces before the start of full-scale hostilities.
        1. svp67
          svp67 April 9 2020 14: 54 New
          +2
          Quote: Alexey RA
          He really didn’t want to fight - but only because he considered Britain unprepared for war and he took all the time to create normal armed forces before the start of full-scale hostilities.

          And what did you do? But what, I brought you peace for decades ...?
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA April 9 2020 16: 42 New
            +4
            Quote: svp67
            And what did you do?

            Nearly. As always, one year was not enough. smile
            If it weren’t for Chamberlain, the limes would be merged as enchantingly as the Franks. Britain fought the first half of the war on Chamberlain's legacy. smile
            Quote: svp67
            But what, I brought you peace for decades ...?

            So this is a politician - one must look not at words, but at actions.
            And the facts are as follows: while still Chancellor of the Treasury, moreover, the "peacekeeping" party, Chamberlain advocated an increase in military spending. And this despite the fact that on duty he was obliged to reduce these costs! More is more: as Prime Minister, Chamberlain increased the military budget fivefold by 1939, adopting a new program to increase the armed forces every year. It was he who pulled the ground forces and the RAF from the fifth point in which they comfortably stayed until 1936.
            Chamberlain professed the concept of "We don’t want war, but we’re ready". He did not want to drag the country into another bloody war, but at the same time he used peacetime to the maximum extent possible to arm Britain.
            1. svp67
              svp67 April 9 2020 17: 26 New
              -4
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Nearly. As always, one year was not enough.

              Yes, yes ... and most importantly, "generals and soldiers" he had the wrong ... but light on his leg, to Dunkirk fled well ...
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA April 9 2020 17: 34 New
                +4
                Quote: svp67
                Yes, yes ... and most importantly, "generals and soldiers" he had the wrong ... but light on his leg, to Dunkirk fled well ...

                On the other hand, it was the British counterattack at Arras that caused the “stop order” of von Rundstedt and made it possible to carry out the evacuation in Dunkirk. And, by and large, what BEC Gorta could do where the army group could not stand the blow.

                As for the generals, the limes stepped on the same rake as the USSR and the USA: the explosive growth of the army immediately before the war, coupled with a meager base for preparing the reserve before the reforms began. Plus the territories.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 April 9 2020 17: 36 New
                  -3
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  On the other hand, it was the British counterattack at Arras that caused the “stop order” of von Rundstedt and made it possible to carry out the evacuation in Dunkirk.

                  Actually, this order was given by Adolf himself. I hoped so to appease the British so that they could sign a peace treaty ... but it did not grow together ...
                  1. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA April 9 2020 18: 34 New
                    +4
                    Quote: svp67
                    Actually, this order was given by Adolf himself. I hoped so to appease the British so that they could sign a peace treaty ... but it did not grow together ...

                    Nope, it’s German generals who piled the "stop order" on the "stupid corporal" in his memoirs. And they all swallowed it. And when historians began to dig documents, it turned out that the stop order was given to von Rundstedt and began to be executed the day before the Fuhrer arrived.
                    In some detail, the freezer parses the stop order for Dunkirk, analyzing all the versions that have been put forward. So, in his opinion, the initiator of the stop order was not Hitler, but the commander of Army Group “A” von Rundstedt. The order, which in content corresponded completely to the stop order, was given in Army Group "A" a day before the order of the Führer. At that moment, the high command wanted to take all the tanks from Rundstedt and transfer them to Army Group B without consulting the Fuhrer. Hitler found out about this from Rundstedt himself and boiled. This order was canceled, and Rundstedt received carte blanche for all his actions, including a stop order. Initially, the stop order was dictated by fear for the flanks. So another myth crumbled - about the stupid Fuhrer and the very, very smart commanders.
                    © Isaev
                    ... Frieser has highlighted a number of important points, such as Rundstedt’s request for a carte blanche to cancel the “stop order” or the time the Führer said about England’s veiled peace offer (Blumentrit refers it to May 24, but in fact it was in early June).

                    The German generals generally found themselves in an ideal situation from the point of whitening their loved ones - they had a universal excuse for all their failures. "we only carried out the order of the Fuhrer". Fortunately, Adolf himself could not answer. smile
    2. neri73-r
      neri73-r April 9 2020 09: 38 New
      +1
      Quote: Olgovich
      The local governments had some information about Naras

      I do not agree with you. They hoped for a "fool" of Hitler who would not take into account the mistakes of the past and go to Russia, and then ..... they (the British and French), without the USA, would defeat Germany and the USSR and become sovereign masters of the Eurasian continent, England would remain the dominant country on the planet, such as the only superpower. But the story went a different way. The Anglo-Saxon brothers from the United States lowered England and France below the baseboard and themselves escaped into world leaders on a par with the USSR, which became the world leader not by intrigue and trade, but deservedly, by the work of the whole people led by I.V. Stalin!
      1. Olgovich
        Olgovich April 9 2020 10: 32 New
        0
        Quote: neri73-r
        I do not agree with you. They hoped for a "fool" of Hitler, who would not take into account the mistakes of the past and go to Russia

        Your right.

        But, I think, in vain do you consider the "little ladies" of Western leaders:: such a desire. with them. unconditionally. It was. but they only hoped that Hitler would quiet down for a long time, "digesting" the fed food
        Actually. this policy is recognized under the name "policy of appeasement of the aggressor"
    3. vladcub
      vladcub April 9 2020 10: 16 New
      +7
      What is true is true. Chamberlain and Daladier proved to be real ostriches. Head in the sand, and booty to the enemy. Hitler rightly despised them:: "I saw them in Munich - worms"
  3. apro
    apro April 9 2020 07: 18 New
    -2
    Yes, everything is clear with the Germans .. but what the British did there is not clear ...
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 9 2020 10: 47 New
      +4
      Quote: apro
      Yes, everything is clear with the Germans .. but what the British did there is not clear ...

      Limes wanted to do the same thing as Jerry. But they were late for a day - and from the invaders turned into liberators. smile
  4. Lamata
    Lamata April 9 2020 07: 25 New
    0
    Battleship Urspayt steers !!! Jerry pounded the Pendels, although I don’t like being expelled, but fought at sea excellently !!!!
    1. Narak-zempo
      Narak-zempo April 9 2020 14: 42 New
      +3
      Quote: Lamata
      but fought at sea perfectly

      They fought in different ways. It’s just such a small British hutspa - to get involved in battle in any balance of power. And when this alignment turned out to be strongly not in their favor, they did receive by the cabbage soup. You can recall at least the Coronel or the Java Sea. Yes, and during the intervention in the Baltic, our patted them.
      1. Ryazan87
        Ryazan87 April 9 2020 18: 07 New
        +1
        Quote: Narak-zempo
        Small British hutspa - get involved in battle in any balance of power.

        this is such a naval tradition that allowed the British to rule the seas for over 100 years. And another 150 years to be considered one of the leading military fleets of the planet.
        Quote: Narak-zempo
        Yes, and during the intervention in the Baltic, our patted them.

        taking into account the level of losses, who rubbed someone there - obviously. Already such a disgrace as the surrender of “Spartacus” and “Avtroil” still look.
  5. Paul Siebert
    Paul Siebert April 9 2020 08: 07 New
    +5
    At dawn on April 9, 1940, the Wehrmacht invaded Denmark without declaring war. Only two divisions and a brigade took part in the attack. Small naval landings were landed. The Nazis did not meet resistance. Denmark lay under Hitler.

    I once asked a friend from Denmark in Copenhagen:
    “Jon, why did you give up to Hitler so quickly?” Day fought everything?
    “So, what's the point?” - replied a colleague, - Wehrmacht was against us, the best army in the world ...
    - If in Denmark then lived Russian population, then we would all die, but would not let the enemy pass ...
    “But then the Germans would have destroyed our country ..” Yon was afraid.
    I thought in confusion ...
    But in the 60s of the XIX century the Danes fought with the Germans twice. For Schleswig-Holstein.
    And in the first war they even seem to have won ...
    The Vikings degraded. And their current combat value generally tends to zero ... wink
    1. Lamata
      Lamata April 9 2020 08: 39 New
      0
      And, by the way, the Danes then came to the Germans, and right now, there are no Vikings
      1. Basil50
        Basil50 April 9 2020 10: 36 New
        0
        The Vikings have never been warriors, they are robbers - bandits. By the way, the word - bandit comes from the word - bond, which means an armed detachment of Vikings.
        The Danes have a combination of limitless cruelty to everyone whom their king will point out, combined with love and tenderness for themselves. The Danes demonstrated this in the year before last and in the last century. In this century, they do not fight. But they demonstrate their own fearlessness either in the killing of animals in the zoo, or in the destruction of the grind, and all this is justified by * traditions * and other crap.
        1. Narak-zempo
          Narak-zempo April 9 2020 14: 54 New
          +2
          "Bandit" - from the "gang", and the gangs were called Landsknecht units, which, yes, were engaged in the robbery of the local population of the enemy (and sometimes the employer - when he ran out of money to pay).
        2. Alf
          Alf April 9 2020 19: 31 New
          0
          Quote: Vasily50
          By the way, the word - bandit comes from the word - bond, which means an armed detachment of Vikings.

          In fact, in Scandinavia, bondholders or bonders were called artisans.
          1. Engineer
            Engineer April 9 2020 21: 00 New
            +2
            Bond is personally free and owned land peasant
            1. Alf
              Alf April 9 2020 21: 06 New
              +1
              Quote: Engineer
              Bond is personally free and owned land peasant

              You are right, I confused. But not at all
              bond, which means an armed Viking squad.
              1. Engineer
                Engineer April 9 2020 21: 09 New
                0
                Here you are undoubtedly right.
  6. Cowbra
    Cowbra April 9 2020 08: 21 New
    10
    In fairness, Hitler was ahead of the Allies, eager to occupy Scandinavia - not even for days, but for hours. As an example, we can recall the really heroic battle of the destroyer Glooveorm with the heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper:

    Where did the destroyer come from? He lagged behind the convoy with the landing and ran into the protection of the already German landing!
    1. Lamata
      Lamata April 9 2020 08: 41 New
      0
      Duck, like he was guarding Glories, but showed Jerry who the British were at sea.
      1. Cowbra
        Cowbra April 9 2020 09: 06 New
        +2
        Glories unlaced Hipper after being repaired at the port after ramming Glouworm. Hipper's second exit from Germany. And this is the FIRST
        1. Qiman Kyrivo
          Qiman Kyrivo April 11 2020 12: 55 New
          0
          The battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau fought Glories.
          1. Kwas
            Kwas 7 June 2020 08: 09 New
            0
            I’ll clarify - they didn’t fight, but simply sunk. He could not raise planes for attack, since everything was jammed with planes received from Norwegian airfields.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 9 2020 10: 51 New
      0
      Quote: Cowbra
      Where did the destroyer come from? He lagged behind the convoy with the landing and ran into the protection of the already German landing!

      Not certainly in that way. The Rinauna group covered mines in Norwegian waters (the first stage of the R4 plan, then there should have been a landing).
      Connection under the command of Vice Admiral William J. Whiteworth (battle cruiser "Rinaun" and destroyers "Greyhound", "Gloworm”,“ Hayperion ”,“ Hirow ”) was allocated for the operational cover of the barrage groups, since information was received about the Norwegian battleships in Narvik, in addition, the enemy’s retaliatory measures could not be completely ruled out.
      © Patyanin S. V. “Weserubung”: Norwegian campaign of 1940
  7. knn54
    knn54 April 9 2020 09: 06 New
    +3
    Germany gave Denmark limited autonomy. The Danish monarchy and government remained untouched. In turn, Denmark was supposed to supply Germany with food and other goods. One of the agreed conditions was that the Germans would not touch 8 Danish Jewish residents.
    1. Krasnodar
      Krasnodar April 9 2020 09: 53 New
      0
      And why then did the Danes evacuate their Jews to Sweden? )))
      1. Basil50
        Basil50 April 9 2020 10: 41 New
        +6
        The Danes corrected their economy in this way.
        Danes evacuated Jews ONLY FOR MONEY. The poor were given a loan at the banks. The last loans for loans to save Jews were repaid in the seventies of the last century.
        Even more Danes enriched themselves in the sale of food, fuel and, of course, wealthy Jews from concentration camps. The Danes were intermediaries in these transactions between the Swedes and the Nazis.
        1. Krasnodar
          Krasnodar April 9 2020 12: 44 New
          0
          Quote: Vasily50
          The Danes corrected their economy in this way.
          Danes evacuated Jews ONLY FOR MONEY. The poor were given a loan at the banks. The last loans for loans to save Jews were repaid in the seventies of the last century.
          Even more Danes enriched themselves in the sale of food, fuel and, of course, wealthy Jews from concentration camps. The Danes were intermediaries in these transactions between the Swedes and the Nazis.

          I heard about the fact that this was done for money, although they still failed to give loans to them without the certainty of repayment at any time. As for mediation - there the Swiss were ahead of the rest
  8. vladcub
    vladcub April 9 2020 10: 06 New
    +2
    I heard on TV back in the 80s when German troops appeared in Copenhagen in the central square. The Royal Guards, an operative formation, opened fierce fire on the Germans. In fact, this was the only episode when Danish troops resisted the invaders.
    1. Pane Kohanku
      Pane Kohanku April 9 2020 15: 41 New
      +4
      In fact, this was the only episode when Danish troops resisted the invaders.

      no, there, like, there was more ... what

      Svyatoslav, looking at these two piglets in helmets, I immediately recall the cult phrase: "... and two brave soldiers - Drankel and Zhrankel ..." hi
  9. Tavrik
    Tavrik April 9 2020 10: 08 New
    +4
    And then the allies did everything to provide “effective assistance” to Norway.

    Well, in general, quite effective ... Three sunk cruisers and a dozen destroyers - this is a very sensitive blow to the kriegsmarine.
  10. Engineer
    Engineer April 9 2020 10: 14 New
    +9
    The corporate identity of the author is to replace the story with an unimaginable vinaigrette from propaganda, omissions, distortions and mistakes.
    The most beautiful and dramatic landing operation and almost the only one carried out in the conditions of strategic domination of the enemy at sea. Real swings at sea and on land and in the air. And at the same time, an operation almost useless for the Germans due to the rapid crushing of the allies in France.
    Not a word that the British were preparing their occupation of Norway themselves, and this allowed them to react very quickly.
    The drama of Narvik on land and at sea was left behind the scenes, even this would refute the author’s thesis about the absence of stubborn fights.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 9 2020 16: 52 New
      +1
      Quote: Engineer
      And at the same time, an operation almost useless for the Germans due to the rapid crushing of the allies in France.

      Not everything is so simple.
      If Norway had been hit after France, then everything would have depended on whether the limes would have evacuated their forces from Norway after Dunkirk or not.
      For if the Weserubung is postponed, then the Allies will occupy Norway. And if the limes do not go away, then instead of the Norwegian army, the Germans will have to pick out several British divisions from Norway, supported by RAF and RN forces based on Norwegian bases.
      1. Engineer
        Engineer April 9 2020 17: 19 New
        +2
        After Dunkirk, they would definitely have been evacuated. Metropolis without protection. If they didn’t, they would have made the Germans a very nice gift. The Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe would drive the Angles out with a filthy broom, inflicting many times many losses. Like in Greece. With the full approval of the local, watching how the occupiers are being persecuted. And no Narviks happened - they just didn’t need such risks. They would have planned to skate rink through Denmark.
        The Reich Chancellor would have liked.
    2. your1970
      your1970 April 9 2020 19: 39 New
      +2
      Quote: Engineer
      The drama of Narvik on land and at sea was left behind the scenes, even this would refute the author’s thesis about the absence of stubborn fights.

      Awesome "stubborn battles !!!" - the regular army on its territory, having supplies and resources, lost the landing !!
      And I also have the feeling that the Germans lost infantry on the same day on 22.06 the entire company in Norway
      1. Engineer
        Engineer April 9 2020 19: 46 New
        +1
        Persistent battles, albeit of local importance.
        And I also have the feeling that the Germans lost infantry on the same day on 22.06 as for the whole company in Norway

        So this is the operational beauty - landing in several places, violation of the mobilization of the enemy, breaking communications, the fifth column. All in all gave a brilliant result. The enemy did not manage to enter the ring, but was already knocked out. The main enemy just fled.
        1. your1970
          your1970 April 9 2020 19: 55 New
          0
          And what is beauty? Beauty was in Grenada, where there was no army at all, but the Cuban builders managed to shoot down several American helicopters and lasted two days against the nuclear power ...
          And in Norway, everyone just raised their legs, having superiority over the landing ... there was no desire to fight ..
          1. Engineer
            Engineer April 9 2020 20: 00 New
            +1
            And in Norway, everyone just raised their paws - having superiority over the landing.

            So where do you get such information from? Read Patyanin. His Weserubung is on a milter.
            1. your1970
              your1970 April 9 2020 20: 07 New
              0
              Beautiful is to replay an equal or much stronger one. The Belarusian operation, for example ...
              And when they won NOT wanting to fight the enemy is like ....
              1. Engineer
                Engineer April 9 2020 20: 10 New
                +1
                Royal Navi was replayed - a much stronger opponent
                The Belarusian operation is not suitable. Superiority was even according to Soviet sources. In technology at times.
      2. Kwas
        Kwas 7 June 2020 08: 33 New
        0
        Quote: your1970
        Quote: Engineer
        The drama of Narvik on land and at sea was left behind the scenes, even this would refute the author’s thesis about the absence of stubborn fights.

        Awesome "stubborn battles !!!" - the regular army on its territory, having supplies and resources, lost the landing !!

        The fighting in places was really stubborn. But at the same time, the Germans in the south quickly seized the Norwegian depots, and the territorial forces were left without weapons. Under Narvik, the Germans were saved only by the invasion of France. Well, the sunken heavy cruiser is also, you know, weighty.
  11. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 9 2020 10: 38 New
    +6
    After the defeat and occupation of Poland, the Third Reich began preparations for an invasion of the West. Hitler was not going to repeat the mistakes of the Kaiser. Before the war with Russia, he was going to defeat France and England, to take revenge on the French.

    More precisely, the defeat of England and France was his main goal. And he perceived the USSR as a second-rate state, the capture of which was due to the need to put pressure on England in order to surrender the latter. We were the second Poland for him, and it was planned to defeat us quickly.
    In fact, London and Paris only imitated Norway's help. She passed it, as before Poland. Soon they will also surrender France. The ruling circles of the “Western democracies” deliberately surrendered to Hitler most of Europe. They showed him that there would be no "second front". That the Germans can calmly end the Russians. Therefore, the British fleet "overslept" the movement of German naval landings. And then the allies did everything to provide “effective assistance” to Norway.

    Oh ho ho, go again party spirit in science. But if the author did not begin to adjust the presented facts to the thesis "the Englishwoman is crap Russia," but really understands the matter, then he could brand the Allies even worse. smile
    Nobody overslept anything. Everything was even worse - the Allies themselves were preparing to occupy neutral Norway (Operation Wilfred, Plan R4). The Germans were only one day ahead of the Allied landing. When RN learned about the German landing, the 1st cruiser squadron could not go to sea because on board the cruisers there was the first echelon of the landing, which had to be unloaded.
    1. vladcub
      vladcub April 9 2020 14: 41 New
      +2
      Say thank you that the author forgot the "evil matrix"
  12. vladcub
    vladcub April 9 2020 10: 45 New
    +4
    “The sudden landing of naval and airborne assault forces, the activity of the Quislingites broke the resistance of the Norwegian armed forces,” the Germans really had a good relationship in operations.
    Stadnyuk very well described how the German saboteurs acted: they sowed panic, killed strong-willed commanders and disrupted communication. If this happened in the Soviet Union, then in Norway
  13. Operator
    Operator April 9 2020 12: 37 New
    -8
    Another thing is interesting - the British, French and Poles fought with the Germans in Norway, but local Norwegians in the amount of 60 thousand soldiers immediately surrendered to the Wehrmacht laughing

    Absolutely the same in terms of the instant surrender of its armed forces previously demonstrated Denmark, then Holland and Belgium. France imitated monthly resistance, and then relinquished in relief.

    In these countries, as well as in the Czech Republic, national governments functioned allied to Germany, the police injected themselves in a sweat uprooting feeble resistance and "finally resolving the Jewish question", industry and agriculture worked shockingly.

    Those. all the peoples of Western and Central Europe joyfully joined the Third Reich of the German nation.
    1. vladcub
      vladcub April 9 2020 14: 32 New
      +2
      The operator, in fact, Czechoslovakia as a result of the Munich agreement was upset by the protectorate of the Czech Republic and Moravia and puppet Slovakia. Slovaks had a negative attitude towards the Nazis. Even the local Glinka fascists almost helped the anti-fascists. There was a good film about this: Rebel Story, when the Slovak battalion surrendered to the Red Army in January 1942. The commander told the Germans forty barrels of prisoners that they were going to catch partisans. The Germans are glad radies, and the Slovaks straightened out over the local traitors along the way.
      I knew eyewitnesses and participants in those events
      1. Operator
        Operator April 9 2020 16: 06 New
        -3
        Learn the materiel - in the Czech Republic (now shamefully called the protectorate of the Czech Republic and Moravia) until the end of WWII, the legally elected Czech president and the government formed by him acted.

        The troops of the Slovak Republic, an ally of the Third Reich, were used by the Germans to occupy Soviet territory and fight the partisans. If in 1944 Slovakia (along with Bulgaria and Romania) went over to the side of the Anti-Hitler coalition, then this only indicates the “flexibility” of the local mentality (betraying the former ally in time is the same as anticipating).
    2. Ryazan87
      Ryazan87 April 9 2020 18: 20 New
      +2
      France imitated monthly resistance, and then relinquished in relief.

      Active phase of the campaign in the West (from May 10 to June 24):
      1. The Luftwaffe has irretrievably lost 1401 plane;
      2. The Wehrmacht - 683 tank 156 thousands a man killed, wounded, missing.
      Normal such imitation.
      For fun, compare with German losses for the period June-first decade of August 1941 in the USSR.
      Belgium capitulated, by the way, after 2 weeks of fighting. Given the fact that it is smaller than the Ryazan region, a good result for itself.
      1. Operator
        Operator April 9 2020 21: 24 New
        -1
        How much did the Wehrmacht lose on the Western Front from September 1, 1939 to May 13, 1940? laughing

        On May 13, 1940, the first clash of the French and Germans took place on the Belgian-French border, and after 12 days the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of France, General Weygand, at a government meeting, offered to capitulate. On June 10, the government fled from Paris to the south.

        As for Belgium, the Wehrmacht passed it in three days from May 10 to May 13, and that was only because of the low throughput of forest roads through the Ardennes.

        Who and when signed the staging surrender for movie cameras - only you, the French and the Belgians are concerned.
    3. strannik1985
      strannik1985 April 9 2020 18: 41 New
      +3
      France imitated monthly resistance

      In this vein, it is possible to say about the USSR that in the summer and fall of 1941 he only imitated resistance.
    4. your1970
      your1970 April 9 2020 19: 43 New
      0
      Quote: Operator
      in these countries, as well as in the Czech Republic, national governments functioned allied to Germany, the police pricked up a sweat to uproot feeble resistance and

      In Norway Norwegian police (!!!!) was armed until 1944 - and only then did the Germans begin to disarm it ...

      Imagine a policeman with a weapon in Smolensk ....... belay
  14. vladcub
    vladcub April 9 2020 14: 15 New
    0
    The Norwegian king Haakon7 was the “banner” of resistance. All Norwegian patriots in the left breast pocket wore: a paper clip and a comb-iron will and the unity of the people, H7-Haakon 7
  15. Astra wild
    Astra wild April 9 2020 15: 33 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    Quote: Alexey RA
    He really didn’t want to fight - but only because he considered Britain unprepared for war and he took all the time to create normal armed forces before the start of full-scale hostilities.

    And what did you do? But what, I brought you peace for decades ...?

    These are “production costs.": Mankind was not ready for peace for decades. But Hitler turned out to be a “northern boy '. Only in this way Chamberlain could explain what happened
  16. NF68
    NF68 April 9 2020 17: 49 New
    +1
    The Germans would not have landed in Norway in April 1940, there the British could have simply landed. And then a kayuk would quickly come to deliveries of iron ore from Sweden to Germany. And without this ore, Germany simply could not have fought as much as the highest quality steel, and even in not a small amount, the Germans received from this ore. For example, Germany received 43% of all steel from Swedish ore, and from ore mined in Germany itself in the same year 46% of steel.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 9 2020 18: 42 New
      +1
      Quote: NF68
      The Germans would not have landed in Norway in April 1940, there the British could have simply landed.

      No we couldbut they would have landed. In real life, the Lime landing operation was only a day late - the first echelon of the landing was already loaded on the cruiser of the 1st squadron.
      1. Operator
        Operator April 9 2020 21: 39 New
        0
        The most important thing in the British landing was not when, but for what - the preventive occupation of Norway in order to prevent it from switching to the side of Germany (exactly like in Iran in 1941).
      2. NF68
        NF68 April 10 2020 18: 28 New
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Quote: NF68
        The Germans would not have landed in Norway in April 1940, there the British could have simply landed.

        No we couldbut they would have landed. In real life, the Lime landing operation was only a day late - the first echelon of the landing was already loaded on the cruiser of the 1st squadron.



        That's for sure. The Germans were a little ahead.
  17. Force multiplier
    Force multiplier April 9 2020 21: 03 New
    +1
    I liked the selection of atmospheric illustrations. This is rarely the case in articles about WWII, especially in a familiarization format, but its text is more accurate and more correct than comments
  18. hohol95
    hohol95 April 9 2020 22: 30 New
    0
    warspot.ru
    Maxim Dianov April 11 '19
    Get to the bottom in Copenhagen
    The flooding of the French Navy in Toulon on November 27, 1942 was one of the most famous examples of the inglorious death of a first-class fleet in recent history. But in the shadow of this high-profile suicide was the fate of another European fleet, covered with the glory of the battles of the sailing era. On August 29, 1943, of its own free will, the Royal Danish Navy went to the bottom.
    .Only the Danish naval attache, Commander-Captain Frits-Oge Hammer-Kjolsen (Frits Aage Hammer Kjølsen), was irritated. Listening to his telephone conversations, the Germans realized that Hammer-Kjolsen had obtained complete information about the upcoming operation, but all Hammer-Kjolsen's persistent attempts to warn the governments of Denmark and Norway about the invasion did not bring any result.....
    ... The degree of readiness of the Danes for defense is evidenced, for example, by such a fact: when the German paratroopers broke into Fort Masnedo, the capture of which Hitler personally attached great importance to, they found there only a chicken coop and two frightened recruits caring for him ....

    This is how Denmark prepared to defend its own territory!
    And those who are perplexed at the words of the Europeans who surrendered without resistance (but wore paper clips or wrote letters ERE) on the walls are right - the property will be DESTROYED!
    And at whose expense to restore? There is a proverb - "A thin world is better than a good quarrel." So they chose for themselves "bad world". But only for MYSELF ...
    ... The political and economic elite of the kingdom showed so uncompromising pragmatism that even Danish historians are forced to admit: in fact it was real collaboration and money-grubbing on a state scale. When the Germans notified the Danish government of their intention to build additional airfields in the north of Jutland, the answer was that the Danes themselves would build these airfields from German building materials and for hard pay. Danish shipowners fought desperately for German quotas for the export of iron ore from Sweden, and achieved success: already in 1941, 670 thousand tons of ore were transported to the Reich by Danish ships.
  19. Ham
    Ham April 10 2020 11: 34 New
    +1
    it was after the war that they began to tell how they fiercely fought against the Nazis, but in fact paws uphill and worked on the Reich until the very end ...
    and if the Germans had won, they would all have yelled "hg!" and would be loyal National Socialists ...
  20. geologist
    geologist 13 May 2020 15: 50 New
    0
    The Germans somehow abruptly advanced ahead in the arms race; fighters of a new generation, armored forces with the latest organization, young soldiers-athletes, eager for a quick victory. Everyone knew perfectly well that in a direct clash they had no chance and they had to take time to catch up with Germany in modernization. Stalin quickly signed up for an alliance with the axis countries, hoping to catch up. The British managed to rivet Hurricanes and Spitfires to the very batch. The French did not have time. The USSR managed to create new planes and tanks in 2,5 years, but had to rearm during the war year.
  21. Kwas
    Kwas 7 June 2020 08: 17 New
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    And at the same time, an operation almost useless for the Germans due to the rapid crushing of the allies in France.

    I do not agree. There are many benefits: They did not let the Britons get into it, cut them off from Sweden, closed the Baltic for them, and distracted them from France. But the harm was, in the ideological field, such as a bad thing.