Thread Tools
Old May 12, 2002, 22:19   #181
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
Quote:
And also, Germany was far from getting the bomb in 1945, but I think they most certainly would have had it by 1950.
You mean 5 years after the US and a year after the Russians? Uhoh

Quote:
Secondly, I think if the Germans were in London after a successful invasion they could have negotiated a treaty with England. You said that England wouldn't agree to peace according to Churchill. Well, Churchill wasn't exactly the most unbiased man on the subject. If HE was in power, that is very true, but on the other hand, if the Germans pulled off the invasion, he wouldn't be in power. I think England would have accepted an equitable peace, which Hitler might have offered.
A)If Hitler was in London, why should he negotiate equitable peace?
B)The British - not just Churchill - would have fought for every inch of land with every available weapon. There were even plans to dump oil into the Channel and light it on fire. They would not have surrendered.

Quote:
What if the Sealion invasion had FAILED? What if all 30+ divisions were wiped out by combined land and sea attack?
It would have taken weeks just to get 30+ divisions into England with opposition from the RN and RAF - I think any landing would have been contained and pushed back.

No Barbarossa might have led to increased German activity in Africa, possibly even an assault on Malta, which would have been disastrous for the British.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 22:21   #182
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
Quote:
The Germans were developing jet bombers (in their early developments by 1945) that would be capable of reaching the eastern coast cities of the United States.
Escorted how? Transatlantic fighters? No, long range jet bombers would have hit hard by US fighters, including the first P-80 Shooting Stars (jets), and would have been a disaster for Germany.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 22:28   #183
Dom Pedro II
King
 
Dom Pedro II's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The College of New Jersey
Posts: 1,098
Quote:
A)If Hitler was in London, why should he negotiate equitable peace?
B)The British - not just Churchill - would have fought for every inch of land with every available weapon. There were even plans to dump oil into the Channel and light it on fire. They would not have surrendered.
Hitler never wanted to take over Britain. He just didn't want to be fighting them. He felt that since they were also part of similar bloodlines, they were worth keeping around. The trouble is that its easy to "They would have fought for every inch...", but when its YOU making the decision to go out and take on a German panzer, its a different story. Actions are made by individuals, and I would imagine many would rather keep their families alive than charge a tank with a rifle.



Quote:
Escorted how? Transatlantic fighters? No, long range jet bombers would have hit hard by US fighters, including the first P-80 Shooting Stars (jets), and would have been a disaster for Germany.
True. I'm just explaining that this is what the Germans were intending to do. It might not have worked, that is true. But I highly doubt there would have been many jet fighters to shoot them down considering that the Americans were still using propeller planes against Russian jet-powered MiG's at the beginning of the Korean War.


Quote:
It would have taken weeks just to get 30+ divisions into England with opposition from the RN and RAF - I think any landing would have been contained and pushed back.
Wait? So you think that they wouldn't have even had a chance to land the 30 divisions. Sorry, I'm genuinely asking. It sounds like you're saying that they couldn't have won but they couldn't have been destroyed either.
__________________
Dom Pedro II - 2nd and last Emperor of the Empire of Brazil (1831 - 1889).

I truly believe that America is the world's second chance. I only hope we get a third...
Dom Pedro II is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 22:42   #184
Cavalcadeus
Warlord
 
Cavalcadeus's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:30
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 224
Quote:
Originally posted by Sprayber


How far are you willing to go to get a copy from her?
She is 70 or 80 years old. If it comes to that, I can live without reading the books.
Cavalcadeus is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 22:46   #185
David James
Prince
 
David James's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:30
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Calgary, Province of Alberta, Dominion of Canada
Posts: 514
Hmmm... Were Britain and France actually contemplating ground action against Germany sometime in 1940? My argument has been based on the assumption that they weren't planning any such thing but I don't know that for sure.
Anyway, if they weren't then my argument is that Germany should have just stayed put, fortifed the Rhineland and built up its military for a planned attack against Russia in 1941. They would have had to leave some troops in the Rhineland but obviously less than they actually had to employ garrisoning France, the Low countries and Scandinavia. This would also allow Germany to keep all their logistical capability available for use in the east. The central point is that Germany's assault on Russia very nearly succeeded in 1941 as it was, and the extra troops and supplies (and not screwing around in the Balkans and Greece for 6 weeks) that would have been afforded by not having to occupy the rest of Europe would have been enough to tip the balance.

The point about the French maybe trying to appease communist elements in France is taken, but then the evidence is that the British at least were willing to supply the Finns against the Soviets, so I'm not sure how much can be read into that either way. Plus, given the later existence of the Vichy regime there were apparently more than a small number of fascists in France anyway, so appeasing communists would hardly be of any help there.

Another point is that until Hitler invaded Western Europe no one really had any sense of how dangerous he was (except maybe Churchill of course). So if he had spent 1940 apparently not doing too much other than offer a buffer against Communism then the western powers may well have been lulled into a sense of complacency. At the same time Stalin was already known to be dangerous, so it's arguable the western powers may have been willing to turn a blind eye to any conflict between the two, at least for awhile. I certainly doubt that Chamberlain would have been ousted on account of Hitler attacking Stalin...

I just don't see what benefit there was in attacking France and Scandinavia. It turned the British from being luke-warm enemies into white-hot enemies because (1) France was overrun and (2) Germany now controlled most of Europe's coastline, something that Britain has always sought to prevent from happening (ie Napoleon). Nor did these conquests add much to Germany's industrial strength (unlike much of central Europe) and there was a tremendous garrisonning cost. The costs outweighed the benefits.


Of course, if the British and French really were planning to attack Germany in 1940 then all of the above is kind of pointless...
David James is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 22:50   #186
MORON
Prince
 
Local Time: 08:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 346
Can't the US just drive carriers around and nuke the rest of the world into a radioactive rubble?

Who needs Eurowimps to win anyway?
__________________
Originally Posted by Theben
Maybe we should push for a law that requires microbiology to be discussed in all bible study courses?
MORON is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 22:58   #187
Dom Pedro II
King
 
Dom Pedro II's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The College of New Jersey
Posts: 1,098
DJ, you have a point. Before the blitz into Western Europe was the Phoney War where it seemed like neither side was doing much of anything. However, the British weren't in Belgium for nothing... I don't think that they would've made the first move initially if Hitler did nothing, but if Hitler opened a war with the Soviets, then most likely they would have siezed the oppurtunity.

On the other hand, maybe not because France and Britain probably would've preferred to let the fascists and communists wipe each other out. Still, I don't think the Western Front would have been inactive for almost a whole year without some kind of fighting.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On another point (just because your post reminded me of it), I have often been one to defend the French for the fiasco of the summer of 1940. True, they were overrun, which was bad, but I don't think this shows cowardice. It was a terrible strategic disaster. The fact that they complied with Hitler isn't cowardice either. Remember, many people in France remembered the horrors of the First World War in which millions of their countrymen were flung into the furnace of the trenches and perished there. As I have said elsewhere, conquest wasn't that common, so they probably assumed that if the Nazis took over then they'd pay reparations, be occupied for a little bit, and that'd be the end of it. Remember, heinsight is 20/20. Petain, the man who created Vichy France, was a schmuck, I have no questions about that, but it was also in southern France where the greatest resistence sprung up. By the time that the French really knew that Hitler meant to stay, military reaction was impossible. The only thing they could do was become subversive. This was the Maquis, and the Maquis did quite a bit in the Resistance. In short, remember that people are people and you can't make blanket statements about one nationality or another.
__________________
Dom Pedro II - 2nd and last Emperor of the Empire of Brazil (1831 - 1889).

I truly believe that America is the world's second chance. I only hope we get a third...
Dom Pedro II is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 23:24   #188
Ethelred
King
 
Ethelred's Avatar
 
Local Time: 16:30
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Anaheim, California
Posts: 1,083
Quote:
Originally posted by Dom Pedro II
David :

The Germans were developing jet bombers (in their early developments by 1945) that would be capable of reaching the eastern coast cities of the United States.
Early jets drank fuel like mad. Those engines would never have done the job at that time. Not till jets were getting most of their thrust from the air that was pushed through by the fans was long range a possibility. Also the the engine temperatures had to be increased quite a lot to get the needed eficiency.
Ethelred is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 23:26   #189
Dom Pedro II
King
 
Dom Pedro II's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The College of New Jersey
Posts: 1,098
Ah whatever... I'm going by what I saw on the History Channel on German jets. They said they could've reached NYC, so I say so. It's not pivotal to my point since (as I said) it would be the worst case scenario.
__________________
Dom Pedro II - 2nd and last Emperor of the Empire of Brazil (1831 - 1889).

I truly believe that America is the world's second chance. I only hope we get a third...
Dom Pedro II is offline  
Old May 12, 2002, 23:29   #190
Ramo
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
Ramo's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:30
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Fear and Oil
Posts: 5,892
DF - Turkey had only aging WWI equipment to fight off any possible violations of its neutrality. I don't see it as all that likely that it could withstand a fullscale German invasion, even if the Italians are involved in the operation.
__________________
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
Ramo is offline  
Old May 13, 2002, 02:02   #191
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
DP,

Quote:
Hitler never wanted to take over Britain. He just didn't want to be fighting them. He felt that since they were also part of similar bloodlines, they were worth keeping around. The trouble is that its easy to "They would have fought for every inch...", but when its YOU making the decision to go out and take on a German panzer, its a different story. Actions are made by individuals, and I would imagine many would rather keep their families alive than charge a tank with a rifle.
Just because Hitler didn't necessarily want war with Britain doesn't mean he would have invaded England, and, with the Royal Family and British Government languishing in the Tower, decided to make an equitable peace.
As for Britain fighting for every inch - the Russians certainly did it.

Quote:
But I highly doubt there would have been many jet fighters to shoot them down considering that the Americans were still using propeller planes against Russian jet-powered MiG's at the beginning of the Korean War.
There was no sense of urgency - the West was concerned with massive military cutbacks, not expenditures.

Quote:
Wait? So you think that they wouldn't have even had a chance to land the 30 divisions. Sorry, I'm genuinely asking. It sounds like you're saying that they couldn't have won but they couldn't have been destroyed either.
If Germany destroyed the BEF in France and been able to land and supply 30-40 divisions, they possibly could have won. But they could not have landed that many troops - the first day of Overlord only 5 divisions were landed by nations with exponentially more naval power than Germany had.

DJ,

Quote:
Anyway, if they weren't then my argument is that Germany should have just stayed put, fortifed the Rhineland and built up its military for a planned attack against Russia in 1941. They would have had to leave some troops in the Rhineland but obviously less than they actually had to employ garrisoning France, the Low countries and Scandinavia. This would also allow Germany to keep all their logistical capability available for use in the east. The central point is that Germany's assault on Russia very nearly succeeded in 1941 as it was, and the extra troops and supplies (and not screwing around in the Balkans and Greece for 6 weeks) that would have been afforded by not having to occupy the rest of Europe would have been enough to tip the balance.
Actually, historically, the garrisons in France and the Balkans only became as big as they were once invasion was a serious threat. The vast majority of the German military (in terms of combat effective troops) participated in Barbarossa.

It sounds to me as if you are saying Germany could garrison the West Wall with under 40 divisions - which would necessarily be low quality troops with Panzer Is and IIs primarily, unless you want to weaken the Barbarossa force.
Against that, in 1941, would be a French force of probably around 100 divisions, and a BEF of probably 15 or so, bothforces independently enjoying armored and air superiority, as well as a 4 or 5 to 1 advantage in manpower.
Again, I would also remind you that when the majority of German airpower was put in the East, Churchill could possibly have successfully advocated the implementation of 'Catherine', cutting off Germany's iron ore, and threatening her entire coast.

Quote:
but then the evidence is that the British at least were willing to supply the Finns against the Soviets, so I'm not sure how much can be read into that either way.
This was mostly an excuse to get troops into Scandanavia, cut off Germany's iron ore, and threaten a northern front.

Quote:
I certainly doubt that Chamberlain would have been ousted on account of Hitler attacking Stalin...
I agree, but Chamberlain was fully committed to war, and had a working relationship with Churchill. Peace would have been unlikely.

Quote:
I just don't see what benefit there was in attacking France and Scandinavia.
It secured Swedish iron ore, excellent U-Boat bases such as St. Nazaire, and wiped out the threat of a 5,000,000 man French army sitting only miles from the Ruhr, as well as throwing the British off the continent, for starters.

Ramo,

Quote:
DF - Turkey had only aging WWI equipment to fight off any possible violations of its neutrality. I don't see it as all that likely that it could withstand a fullscale German invasion, even if the Italians are involved in the operation.
There is the problem of crossing the Bosporous in the face of English naval and air superiority. The Brits would certainly have landed troops and especially air power in Turkey, and been able to use Turkish bases to toss Italy totally out of the Eastern Med, as well as Germany's main oil fields at Ploesti being within range. Turkey was also not ideal blitzkrieg country, and a slugging match and attrition was to Turkey/Britain's benefit here.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
Old May 13, 2002, 02:50   #192
Dom Pedro II
King
 
Dom Pedro II's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The College of New Jersey
Posts: 1,098
Quote:
As for Britain fighting for every inch - the Russians certainly did it.
I don't think that's a really fair comparison. I mean, the Nazis were pillaging and destroying as they moved through Eastern Europe since they thought the Slavs were a subhuman race. The Russians would've joined Hitler to get away from Stalin if he hadn't been even worse than Stalin once he got there. This kind of war wouldn't have been what they would have seen in Britain. As I said before, in autumn of 1940, nobody had seen what horrors Nazi Germany was truly capable of.

The point is that I think that it would have taken a lot to get the British fighting in house-to-house fighting with the German Army. For that to even happen though, some sort of terms of surrender would already have to be worked out and the Germans would have to continue occupying Britain for quite some time, which is not what I think Hitler would have done. If, let's say, the British offered a truce under such and such terms, and then the Germans replied that they would only accept unconditional surrender, it might have roused guerilla warfare amongst the British population. If they demanded annexation or the establishment of a new government, than it most probably would have.


Anyway, so you think that Operation Sea Lion wouldn't have been a disaster for the Germans even if they failed?
__________________
Dom Pedro II - 2nd and last Emperor of the Empire of Brazil (1831 - 1889).

I truly believe that America is the world's second chance. I only hope we get a third...
Dom Pedro II is offline  
Old May 13, 2002, 14:04   #193
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
DP,

My opinion that Britain would have fought no matter what is based upon my understanding of British thought and opinion regardng the war coming from Chirchill - it's conjecture and I could always be wrong.

Quote:
Anyway, so you think that Operation Sea Lion wouldn't have been a disaster for the Germans even if they failed?
It depends on what they did afterward.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
Old May 13, 2002, 14:34   #194
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 16:30
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
DF, et al., Despite all the tactical mistakes of the Germans and Japanese, it is clear to me that the Axis had only one small chance to win WWII. Germany had to take Moscow in 1941 and force Soviet capitulation. This would have opened a supply line to Japan through Russia, thus obviating their need to attack the U.S. Without Pearl Harbor, active American participation would probably not have occurred. Eventually, Japan would have taken all of China and the British and the Germans would have negotiated a peace. The Brits undoubtedly would have negotiated for a German withdrawal from France, etc., as a condition of peace. I believe the Germans would have agreed to this.

Ned
__________________
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en

Last edited by Ned; May 15, 2002 at 15:00.
Ned is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 07:51   #195
Serb
Emperor
 
Serb's Avatar
 
Local Time: 07:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: of Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Posts: 3,345
Even if he took the Moscow, it changed nothing we’ve keep fought till last man.
Serb is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 08:58   #196
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
Quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
Yes, Poland kicked Russia's ass in the 1920s.
they barely avoided becoming polish soviet socialist republic. saved by the bell.
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 09:01   #197
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
Quote:
Originally posted by orange
Russo-Japanese war? That was a Japanese victory
KH, Orange,
He was, I reckon, thinking about Khalkhin-Gol incident where in 1937 Zhukov kicked Japanese ass over some distant contested steppes. He was pretty able to utilize Russian armor superiority, and the Japanese made sure not to face Russian army again. That's why they started sewing tropical outfits.
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 12:19   #198
Urban Ranger
NationStatesApolyton Storywriters' GuildNever Ending Stories
Deity
 
Urban Ranger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 08:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: The City State of Noosphere, CPA special envoy
Posts: 14,606
Quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Germany had to take Moscow in 1941 and force Soviet capitulation.
Wouldn't happen even if the Nazis took Moscow. Stalin had plans for a war time capital, he just never needed it.
__________________
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."
Urban Ranger is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 12:29   #199
Urban Ranger
NationStatesApolyton Storywriters' GuildNever Ending Stories
Deity
 
Urban Ranger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 08:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: The City State of Noosphere, CPA special envoy
Posts: 14,606
Quote:
Originally posted by David James
The central point is that Germany's assault on Russia very nearly succeeded in 1941 as it was, and the extra troops and supplies (and not screwing around in the Balkans and Greece for 6 weeks) that would have been afforded by not having to occupy the rest of Europe would have been enough to tip the balance.
Hard to say at this point. If Germany didn't pacify the Balkins and Greece that could post a severe problem to the supply lines. It seems implausible that the the whole Eastern Front would change dramatically with a few extra Nazi divisions with low grade equipment. Remeber too the fighting in the West gave those German troops much needed combat experience and time to iron out the bugs in the blitzkrieg doctrine.
__________________
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."
Urban Ranger is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 12:38   #200
Dom Pedro II
King
 
Dom Pedro II's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The College of New Jersey
Posts: 1,098
I think in the end Russia was just too vast to possibly control. Even if the Soviet Union became a politically dead entity from a successful Nazi invasion (which is somewhat feasible) partisan fighting would have gone on, and it is unlikely that Hitler have possibly consolidated his control over all of Russia. If they took Moscow and the Soviets collapsed, then another political group would move into the Urals where the factories were and the fighting would continue.
__________________
Dom Pedro II - 2nd and last Emperor of the Empire of Brazil (1831 - 1889).

I truly believe that America is the world's second chance. I only hope we get a third...
Dom Pedro II is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 12:45   #201
Urban Ranger
NationStatesApolyton Storywriters' GuildNever Ending Stories
Deity
 
Urban Ranger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 08:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: The City State of Noosphere, CPA special envoy
Posts: 14,606
Napoleon took Moscow. A lot of good that did him.
__________________
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."
Urban Ranger is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 13:39   #202
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
serb,

Quote:
Even if he took the Moscow, it changed nothing we’ve keep fought till last man.
Moscow was a huge communications and transportation hub. Fighting to the last man does you no good if you can't transport, supply, or talk to many of your solders.

Quote:
Wouldn't happen even if the Nazis took Moscow. Stalin had plans for a war time capital, he just never needed it.
Yes, at Kuibyshev. Of course, Kuibyshev was not a central transportation and communications hub, like Moscow.

Quote:
Hard to say at this point. If Germany didn't pacify the Balkins and Greece that could post a severe problem to the supply lines. It seems implausible that the the whole Eastern Front would change dramatically with a few extra Nazi divisions with low grade equipment. Remeber too the fighting in the West gave those German troops much needed combat experience and time to iron out the bugs in the blitzkrieg doctrine.
That is true - the Germans needed more time, not more men. All they kept in the West were 35 low grade divisions (for the most part) that really wouldn't have been too useful.

Quote:
Napoleon took Moscow. A lot of good that did him.
*shrug* Apples and oranges - different time period, different campaign.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 15:49   #203
jdjdjd
PtWDG RoleplayCivilization III Democracy Game
Prince
 
jdjdjd's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:30
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2002
Location: of España
Posts: 811
The Germans could have held most of Europe if not for their stupidity in invading Russia. Had they consolidated their efforts on Britain, Britain would have eventually fell. The problem with the Axis was that they never really thought it out. Keep US and Russia at bay, and they would have so much. Too bad the smartest of them and least psychotic, was the weakest (Mussolini), or things may have been different.
__________________
Note: the Law Offices of jdjdjd are temporarily closed.
"Next time I say something like 'lets go to Bolivia', lets go to Bolivia"
jdjdjd is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 16:10   #204
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
Quote:
Had they consolidated their efforts on Britain, Britain would have eventually fell.
How?
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 17:08   #205
Faeelin
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Tau Ceti
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally posted by Serb
Even if he took the Moscow, it changed nothing we’ve keep fought till last man.
For the first time ever, I'll agree with Serb. Russia might've collapsed if Hitler had treated the Ukrainians and such better (We've come to free you from the soviets and givey our your own tinpot dictators! Rejoice!).

But the atrocities by the Nazis made it so that the only option was victory or death for russia, and Russia had more troops, resources, and perhaps a greater will as well.

Even if the Germans get into Moscow, they can't do much there. A few days, weeksat most, and the soviet forces drive em back out.

Or would you care to explain whyt he Soviets wouldnt' fight as hard for their capital as for Stalingrad?
Faeelin is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 17:52   #206
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 16:30
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
As all know, I believe it was over for the Axis when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. But it is clear that events drove Japan to attack. Diplomatic communiques reveal that on Nov. 20, 1941, Japan had decided that negotiations had to be successful, or else war was required. I give you a quote from Tojo.

Quote:
8. Around November 20th [1941], conditions were on the verge of deteriorating even further. In order to avoid a rupture of diplomatic relations, the government resisted strong pressures from the high command and made a proposal containing a number of concessions.
But what "deterioration" happened on or just before Nov. 20, 1941? The following is the only significant event that I can find:

Quote:
November 18th, 1941...German troops attacking Venev, on the southern pincer drive to Moscow, are themselves counterattacked by a Siberian division and an armored brigade. These forces bring something new to the battlefield: white fur coats for the Siberian infantry and the T-34 tank, whose American Christie suspension, sloping armor, and 76mm gun make it one of the most powerful in the world. The Germans fight back, but the extreme cold freezes their automatic weapons. The Germans panic. "This was the first time that such a thing had occurred during the Russian campaign, and it was a warning that the combat ability of our infantry was at an end, and that they should no longer be expected to perform difficult tasks." Quoting the German commander.
I believe it is "clear" that the failure to take Moscow, the Soviet counerattack, the introduction of the T34 and the panic of German troops forced Japan's hand despite their denials. I can only imagine what Hitler had to say to the Japanese ambassador the morning of the 19th.

Ned
Ned is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 18:10   #207
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
Faeelin,

Quote:
Or would you care to explain whyt he Soviets wouldnt' fight as hard for their capital as for Stalingrad?
The proper course would have been to envelop Moscow in a classic double encirclement (as in Kiev), destroy the remaining <100,000 armed troops defending Moscow, and let the city starve. Those 100,000 men were high quality troops without which a Soviet counterattack would have been difficult, to say the least, even assuming a counterattack could have been mounted with broken transportation, communication, and supply networks and in the midst of a government transfer to Kuibyshev.

Ned,

Quote:
But what "deterioration" happened on or just before Nov. 20, 1941? The following is the only significant event that I can find:
No, the deterioration was that Japan was running out of oil and other resources, and without them would be pretty much forced to withdraw from China - an incredible loss of face to the Army in a society in which face is everything.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 18:22   #208
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 16:30
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
Quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
Ned,



No, the deterioration was that Japan was running out of oil and other resources, and without them would be pretty much forced to withdraw from China - an incredible loss of face to the Army in a society in which face is everything.
David, Could provide a link to anything that would support your contention? Ned
Ned is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 18:52   #209
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
Quote:
David, Could provide a link to anything that would support your contention? Ned
My contention is actually fairly common knowledge. No, I can't provide you a link off the top of my head, but it is a well known fact that Japan was almost out of oil, because of the embargo, and without oil it's navy could not operate, nor could its mobile ground forces, which would force a withdrawal from most of China.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
Old May 15, 2002, 18:56   #210
David Floyd
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:30
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Posts: 4,620
If you need a source for the oil embargo or Japan's reserves of oil for wartime consumption, I'd recommend checking out the military history section of a decent bookstore. Liddel Hart's "History of the Second World War" is a fairly basic overview, but (IIRC) it provides such figures.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DaveDaDouche
Read my seldom updated blog where I talk to myself: http://davedadouche.blogspot.com/
David Floyd is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:30.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team