- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hot take on Germany’s invasion of the USSR
Posted on 2/23/25 at 6:56 pm to sledgehammer
Posted on 2/23/25 at 6:56 pm to sledgehammer
I thought the winter weather played the biggest factor? What if they would have invaded in July?
0
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:10 pm to Porpus
quote:
I think winning the war was their top priority. All those Jews just starved to death. There's footage to back that up, FFS.
Zyklon B, "death camps," lampshades made of Jew skin- it's all theatrics. It's comforting for people to think of the Nazis as the diabolical supervillain types. The actual truth, that the Nazis were just a typical "big government" political party who ran out of money, would terrify many of us.
Yes, it’s a lie
People died of malnutrition and disease.
The death toll figures aren’t real either. A low estimate comes in around 300k.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:10 pm to biglego
quote:
The AfD is only far right by retard left standards, and that it only came in 2nd tells us that Germany is truly in a bad state.
They're so far right their leader is a lesbian that munches with a Sri Lankan.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:21 pm to sledgehammer
I worked with a man that worked the supply line from Turkey to Russia. He said it was 24/7 for months. Said it was unbelievable the amount of supplies via that corridor.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:23 pm to jeffsdad
quote:
I worked with a man that worked the supply line from Turkey to Russia. He said it was 24/7 for months. Said it was unbelievable the amount of supplies via that corridor.
We built a railroad through Iran to supply Russia.
It's amazing how much we provided them while giving our own military everything, and more, than it needed.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:28 pm to sledgehammer
Germany’s best hope for victory was to focus on taking Moscow as soon as possible and not allow Hitler to lose focus and turn the Panzer Groups this way and that, both to the North and South in the late summer and early autumn of 1941.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:31 pm to HarryBalzack
quote:That's a mistake in reasoning.
Assume that Britain falls and all her territories go with her.
If Britain had fallen, then Canada would have aligned with the US. Probably Australia too, as they were fearful of the Japanese, and we were already fighting them. The Japs didn't seem too concerned about honoring many deals with the Germans, they just wanted control of that part of the world.
And the Soviets still would have been able to do their rope-a-dope fallback to the East, as the Japs didn't bother to try to apply pressure to the Soviets from that front.
If Britain had surrendered, we would own Canada and any British territory in our hemisphere.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:32 pm to BuckyCheese
Yeah, it was probably Iran, not Turkey. I get them confused.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:42 pm to TigersnJeeps
And it was that way until the war was almost over
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:50 pm to sledgehammer
Yeah if Nazi Germany was completely different maybe they could have been more successful
This post was edited on 2/23/25 at 7:52 pm
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:52 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
eating Nazi
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:52 pm to OWLFAN86
not sure how autocorrect got there but it was likely
my faulr
my faulr
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:54 pm to SammyTiger
i figured but the typo gave me a chuckle
Posted on 2/23/25 at 7:55 pm to Lima Whiskey
quote:
The death toll figures aren’t real either. A low estimate comes in around 300k.
It's an interesting question. I haven't really explored it much, but it's worth contemplating what the official numbers imply.
Buchenwald opened in 1937 and operated for almost 8 years. If we assume that 8 years is a good definition of the Holocaust, then to kill 6,000,000 Jews you'd need to kill a bit more than 2,000 per day- every day, for 8 years. Sunday, Christmas... 2,000 Jews.
A similar number of non-Jews died in the Holocaust, we are told. So say 4,000 people per day, for 8 years.
Could the logistics of that be accommodated? Well, 4,000 people per day is a bit more than twice the total casualties suffered by the German military in WWII. It's not 100 times or 1,000 times that number, so I guess it could have happened.
It's a lot, though. And going back to the comment I responded to, it really is an awfully large undertaking for a nation already engaged in a war.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 8:03 pm to Porpus
quote:
Buchenwald opened in 1937 and operated for almost 8 years. If we assume that 8 years is a good definition of the Holocaust, then to kill 6,000,000 Jews you'd need to kill a bit more than 2,000 per day- every day, for 8 years. Sunday, Christmas... 2,000 Jews.
The killing of Jews didn't really ramp up until 1942 and essentially ended in early 1945.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 8:05 pm to Porpus
I believe the original stats. Revising them does no good. And yes, its possible to kill 2000 per day especially when your entire belief system is built on the belief that Jews are evil and need to be exterminated.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 8:12 pm to sledgehammer
quote:
Germans would’ve used their full force to push the Allies out of North Africa and England would’ve soon been invaded.
There is no chance they push the allies out of North Africa. There are too many ports and the allies controlled the seas. There is even less chance that, after losing The Battle of Britain, and any chance of air parity, they could have invaded Britain. The allies had air superiority and sea superiority.
The cause was lost in 1939 when three mid-GDP countries tried to take on the free world plus the USSR, with a combined GDP twice theirs.
Look at this chart of GDPs and you can easily see who is going to win
Posted on 2/23/25 at 8:24 pm to Lima Whiskey
quote:
Napoleon took Moscow and still lost
Completely different scenario. Nearly all of of the USSR's war production was out of Moscow. Capture Moscow in 1941 and you cut off 90% of production and throw their leadership into complete disarray.
Not saying they would have 100% won the war, but it would have changed the game.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 8:30 pm to Penrod
quote:The US alone outproduced the all other combatants, Axis and Ally, but something like 2:1. It's mindboggling, really.
The cause was lost in 1939 when three mid-GDP countries tried to take on the free world plus the USSR, with a combined GDP twice theirs.
Posted on 2/23/25 at 8:35 pm to Penrod
quote:
There is no chance they push the allies out of North Africa. There are too many ports and the allies controlled the seas. There is even less chance that, after losing The Battle of Britain, and any chance of air parity, they could have invaded Britain. The allies had air superiority and sea superiority.
Hitler half assed North Africa, never fully committing to it. There were more worthless Italians there than Germans.
He would have been better off sending what became the Afrika Korps to the eastern front versus weakening it with the African adventure.
Mussolini can be credited with assisting the Allies in Hitler's downfall what with his misadventures syphoning off German assets to save his arse. He didn't clear the move on Greece with Hitler, rather just went on his own.
And got his arse kicked, forcing a delay to Barbarossa of a few weeks. Weeks that may have been very important in November/December on the outskirts of Moscow.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News