- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- 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
0
Posted on 10/29/24 at 12:50 pm to Commandeaux
The only way the Nazis win in this scenario is if they get an atom bomb
There is no other way for them to successfully take Britain and Russia
At the height of their power in 1940 Britain whipped their arse in the Battle for Air Supremacy. They were never getting across the channel without the A bomb
There is no other way for them to successfully take Britain and Russia
At the height of their power in 1940 Britain whipped their arse in the Battle for Air Supremacy. They were never getting across the channel without the A bomb
Posted on 10/29/24 at 12:51 pm to Pandy Fackler
Interesting answers.
I'll ask it a different way. Were American troops needed to win the war?
I'll ask it a different way. Were American troops needed to win the war?
Posted on 10/29/24 at 12:51 pm to Commandeaux
quote:
Once the US told Stalin that Japan wasn't going to attack, he devoted most of his resources to Germany and pushed back the Nazis.
Yeah, no. It was mother nature who aided russia more than anything they had. That and supply lines.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 12:54 pm to Pandy Fackler
quote:I would say it was “needed” for a decisive victory and full Nazi surrender
I'll ask it a different way. Were American troops needed to win the war?
Without it, the Nazis stil “lose” but the loss is far more drawn out and fare less decisive
Think Germany still gaining land, not Nuremberg trials, etc. More of a “yeh we won, but it sure feels a lot like a tie”
Also this is a prime thread for Darth
This post was edited on 10/29/24 at 12:55 pm
Posted on 10/29/24 at 12:56 pm to Pandy Fackler
quote:
1. Was there a peaceful solution prior to its start?
I guess they could have all surrendered to the Nazis, would have been peaceful for some of them, ultimate peace for others. Lots of cities wouldn't have been bombed out.
quote:
2. Was the United States needed to win it?
Not too sure our troops were all that needed, but our manufacturing certainly was. You know, that part of our country that all our politicians want to send to China, Mexico, etc.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 12:57 pm to Pandy Fackler
1. No. Hitter wanted a war , at the minimum , with France to avenge the post WW1 injustices and he USSR over ideological control of Europe. Neither could be avoided or resolved without war
2 The Nazis are not defeated without the US. Lend Lease kept both the UK and USSR alive between 1940–42. Neither survive without lend lease. The USSR would not have been able to fire a rifle, shoot a shell, roll a tank , or truck supplies without lend lease. The USSR /Russia paid dearly with their blood , but they conveniently leave out the money and supplies the US provided to them via Lend Lease when discussing how “they” defeated the Nazis in the “Great Patriotic War”.
2 The Nazis are not defeated without the US. Lend Lease kept both the UK and USSR alive between 1940–42. Neither survive without lend lease. The USSR would not have been able to fire a rifle, shoot a shell, roll a tank , or truck supplies without lend lease. The USSR /Russia paid dearly with their blood , but they conveniently leave out the money and supplies the US provided to them via Lend Lease when discussing how “they” defeated the Nazis in the “Great Patriotic War”.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 12:58 pm to Pandy Fackler
1. Only peace would’ve revolved around the nations of Europe surrendering their sovereignty to Germany.. Austria being an example..
2. Unquestionably Yes. The Germans would’ve eventually gotten the bomb had we not been knee deep in Europe
2. Unquestionably Yes. The Germans would’ve eventually gotten the bomb had we not been knee deep in Europe
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:12 pm to Pandy Fackler
1. No. Hitler and Stalin were both arming for huge land grabs, so war was inevitable. And then there was Japan...
2. US naval convoys supplied aid which kept the Soviet army from starving to death and much of their trucks, planes and fuel came from the USA. The UK was also greatly supported by US shipping convoys. US air power shifted the balance of power and initiative to the point that Germany was on the defensive from air strikes even at home. And US artillery changed the nature of ground warfare on the Western theater. And planning on the scale of Operation Overlord was not likely without the US military.
2. US naval convoys supplied aid which kept the Soviet army from starving to death and much of their trucks, planes and fuel came from the USA. The UK was also greatly supported by US shipping convoys. US air power shifted the balance of power and initiative to the point that Germany was on the defensive from air strikes even at home. And US artillery changed the nature of ground warfare on the Western theater. And planning on the scale of Operation Overlord was not likely without the US military.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:14 pm to lsupride87
The US supplied 2/3rds of all allied military equipment. Without that the Russians and Brits would have been overrun. But if you don’t believe me maybe you will believe Stalin who said,
“The most important things in this war are machines. … The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through lend-lease, we would have lost the war.”
“The most important things in this war are machines. … The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through lend-lease, we would have lost the war.”
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:34 pm to ryanlsu
quote:
… The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through lend-lease, we would have lost the war.”
And the US tying up valuable German resources.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:40 pm to Pandy Fackler
If the US wasn’t involved the Soviets would’ve just kept going to France & Spain
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:41 pm to Pandy Fackler
quote:
1. Was there a peaceful solution prior to its start?
Short of the Soviet Union willingly giving up most of its territory west of the Ural Mountains to the Germans? No.
quote:
2. Was the United States needed to win it?
Absolutely. Without Lend Lease, the Soviets would have collapsed no later than 1944. Simply put, the Soviets Union could not support itself from a logistics standpoint, especially after the Wehrmacht overran most of Ukraine that provided the Soviets with the overwhelming majority of their grain. The Soviets lacked the ability to feed or even clothe the Red Army after the initial invasion of 1941. It lacked the ability to produce enough motor transport to support the Red Army. It lacked the ability to refine nearly enough aviation fuel to keep its Air Force operating. It lacked the ability to produce a myriad of items needed in a modern army, things like radios, commo wire, medical supplies, etc. Basically, the Soviets could make two things (1) arms and (2) bullets in vast quantities. But without American aid, all those arms and all that ammunition would have sat outside the factory with no way to get to the front where the Red Army would be rapidly devolving into an unorganized mob of starving men with no means of transportation, no way to communicate and coordinate operations, and dwindling levels of virtually everything.
Plus, though it’s often downplayed comparative to the size and scope of the Eastern Front, the Italian and later Western fronts, tied down a large number of Wehrmacht divisions desperately needed in Russia. Take away these two fronts, and the Germans would have had about 70 more divisions, including 10 additional panzer divisions, to use in Russia.
Plus there was the strategic bombing campaign over Germany that drained valuable resources, especially Luftwaffe resources, that were busy defending Germany instead of helping the Wehrmacht in Russia. The main reason the Soviets were able to gain air superiority on the Eastern Front after 1943 was due to the fact a huge portion of the Luftwaffe, both fighters and flak formations, were in Germany to defend against the Allied bombing campaign.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:47 pm to Pandy Fackler
quote:
Was the United States needed to win it?
Our stuff was needed for sure. If we didn’t send troops to Europe, the war would have drug on much longer.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:51 pm to Pandy Fackler
1. The main way would have been some way of preventing Hitler from coming to power - possibly making changes to the Treaty of Versailles to make it less onerous on the German people. Might have made his radicalism less appealing and prevented him from getting elected.
2. Once no country stood up to Hitler early on, the US was definitely needed to win - both in terms of matériel support and troops.
2. Once no country stood up to Hitler early on, the US was definitely needed to win - both in terms of matériel support and troops.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:53 pm to TheHarahanian
quote:
I think the Japanese would have taken everything they wanted and fortified their positions.
I believe that when the Japanese met Russian regulars on mainland Asia (I think it was Korea?) in WWII they were rebuffed pretty thoroughly.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:54 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Our stuff was needed for sure. If we didn’t send troops to Europe, the war would have drug on much longer.
It’s often said that as long as we gave them lend lease, the Russians would have eventually won even without the Western or Itilian fronts. I’d argue though perhaps not. For starters, as I mentioned above, the Western and Italian fronts sucked up something like 70 divisions, including at least 10 panzer divisions. But also, and this is also often overlooked, the Russians were reaching the point of exhaustion by Spring 1945. Many of their frontline divisions were shells, many below 50% strength. And the Russians were finding it difficult to make good on the massive losses they’d suffered since the start of the war. I’d argue it’s entirely possible that if the Germans did not have to worry about any others fronts or having their cities turned into piles of rubble, the Germans could have fought the Soviets to the point of collapse similar to how they did to Russia in 1917.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:56 pm to TheJunction
Here's the problem with that thought. No matter the provisions of the Versailles Treaty, you had the Germans in a negotiated surrender still in essentially an offensive position with the front lines still in France.
I think given that and Germany untouched physically probably had as much to do with WWII as anything from Versailles and the bad lines drawn. 20% of Czechoslovakia was ethnic German. Parts of Poland as well.
But the Germans were not defeated the way they were in WWII....they essentially gave up which led to resentment and the feeling that the soldiers were basically stabbed in the back.
This has to be factored in any discussion on WWII...and WWI
I think given that and Germany untouched physically probably had as much to do with WWII as anything from Versailles and the bad lines drawn. 20% of Czechoslovakia was ethnic German. Parts of Poland as well.
But the Germans were not defeated the way they were in WWII....they essentially gave up which led to resentment and the feeling that the soldiers were basically stabbed in the back.
This has to be factored in any discussion on WWII...and WWI
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:56 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
I believe that when the Japanese met Russian regulars on mainland Asia (I think it was Korea?) in WWII they were rebuffed pretty thoroughly.
It was in China, Manchuria to be specific. There was some pretty serious border clashes there between the Soviets and Japanese in 1939. The Soviets scored some rather lopsided victories over the Japanese there to the point Japan decided they didn’t want none from the Soviets.
Posted on 10/29/24 at 1:58 pm to lsupride87
quote:
They were never getting across the channel without the A bomb
Unless the A Bomb was delivered with a V2 rocket, how would they deliver it to England. You just said England had air superiority
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News