- 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: Was the allies winning WW 2 inevitable?
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:22 pm to TigerintheNO
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:22 pm to TigerintheNO
quote:
What if Hitler didn't declare war on the US? Instead 12/8/41 declared that he supports the United States in their defense against the sneak attack by this Asian aggressor.
Hitler was still hoping that the Japanese would join in against Russia. No way he would throw them under the bus when he desperately needed them to open a southern front against Russia.
This post was edited on 1/19/17 at 7:25 pm
2
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:23 pm to goldennugget
quote:
A lot of what Germany did was in defense or in retaliation, they were rarely the aggressor
Yeah, whatever you Nazi sympathizer. Sorry your Aryan world didn't work out.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:25 pm to goldennugget
quote:
A lot of what Germany did was in defense or in retaliation, they were rarely the aggressor
Let me guess, they gloss over the Massive Jew armies in Poland that were lining up to attack Munich
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:25 pm to goldennugget
quote:
A lot of what Germany did was in defense or in retaliation, they were rarely the aggressor
Like what? Be specific.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:28 pm to goldennugget
quote:
A lot of history books are wrong about WW2
A lot of what Germany did was in defense or in retaliation, they were rarely the aggressor
WTF?
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:29 pm to Ponchy Tiger
For those of you who don't know goldennugget, he is an open Nazi sympathizer who hates the Jews. Just ignore him in any WWII thread.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:31 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
, he is an open Nazi sympathizer who hates the Jews. Just ignore him in any WWII thread.
Even so, I would love to see him explain this thinking.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:35 pm to goldennugget
quote:
We would have never dropped the atom bomb on Germany
Had the Nazi's made it another year Berlin would've been a sheet of glass bruh
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:39 pm to athenslife101
If the Nazis had won at Stalingrad the world as we know it could've been a lot different
The Allies still would've won eventually but it would've taken much longer with the Russians being decimated
The Allies still would've won eventually but it would've taken much longer with the Russians being decimated
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:49 pm to athenslife101
no
Hitler had scientists who created atomic bombs.
Hitler had jet planes.
if he were just a bit more patient, he would have ruled the world, including taking China and SE asia from Japan after he took over western hemisphere.
Hitler had scientists who created atomic bombs.
Hitler had jet planes.
if he were just a bit more patient, he would have ruled the world, including taking China and SE asia from Japan after he took over western hemisphere.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:51 pm to CelticDog
quote:
if he were just a bit more patient, he would have ruled the world, including taking China and SE asia from Japan after he took over western hemisphere.
That would have taken at least until the 1960s and America would already be waiting for them over there by that point.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 7:55 pm to athenslife101
As long as the U.S. was supplying the Soviet and British armies with food and ammunition, victory was innevitable. The Italians were completely useless.
However, the Axis could have won had they:
A. Refrained from attacking the Soviet Union until Britain was out of the war
B. Bombed the originally planned radar stations and airfields in Britain instead of focusing on the urban terror campaign.
C. Japan going forward with the final bombing run to hit our fuel depot and finish off the air fields
D. Germany not declaring war on the U.S. and publicly denouncing Japan's sneak attack.
If these things happen, Germany gains air superiority over Britain and uses it to leverage a peace agreement or facilitate an amphibeous landing. This eventually results in a German win the West.
Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor cripples the Pacific Fleet as designed, forcing the U.S. to either sue for peace ceding control of the oil rich Philippines to Japan without further fighting or take much much longer to mobilize forces and risk losing Hawaii too.
With the U.S., Britain, and France out, Japan conquors China, Indonesia, IndoChina, and the Philippines. Japan then coordinates with Germany to attack the Soviet Union without the U.S. supplying them.
German forces break through and take Moscow, knocking them out. The axis basically win, the U.S. stays out of the rest of the fray.
However, the Axis could have won had they:
A. Refrained from attacking the Soviet Union until Britain was out of the war
B. Bombed the originally planned radar stations and airfields in Britain instead of focusing on the urban terror campaign.
C. Japan going forward with the final bombing run to hit our fuel depot and finish off the air fields
D. Germany not declaring war on the U.S. and publicly denouncing Japan's sneak attack.
If these things happen, Germany gains air superiority over Britain and uses it to leverage a peace agreement or facilitate an amphibeous landing. This eventually results in a German win the West.
Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor cripples the Pacific Fleet as designed, forcing the U.S. to either sue for peace ceding control of the oil rich Philippines to Japan without further fighting or take much much longer to mobilize forces and risk losing Hawaii too.
With the U.S., Britain, and France out, Japan conquors China, Indonesia, IndoChina, and the Philippines. Japan then coordinates with Germany to attack the Soviet Union without the U.S. supplying them.
German forces break through and take Moscow, knocking them out. The axis basically win, the U.S. stays out of the rest of the fray.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 8:42 pm to SuperSaint
quote:
You really are one dumb motherfricker... and I don't say that much and I try to give a little leeway to the posters around here.. You really might be the worst poster of all time
Most likely a garden variety Troll.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 8:59 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
Everyone would probably be dead in Moscow. Slavs were right below the Jews in his mind and he would have killed them all.
Actually he wanted to enslave the Slavs. The plan was to take over Eastern Europe and Russia and populate it with Germans who would rule as the master race over the slave race of the Slavs. This is after killing all Jews obviously. It seems like a pretty wacky plan, but damn if they didn't almost pull it off.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 9:19 pm to athenslife101
Had Japan attacked Russia before Hitler began Barbarossa, that could have made a huge difference. I think in fact Stalin feared that because he KNEW Hitler was his ally and was convinced he was safe to the east, but knew that they would eventually have a second Russo-Japanese war.
Let's say Japan attacks Russia at Hitler's behest and cuts the trans siberian railroad and takes Vladivostok and cuts off Siberia. Then Hitler starts Barbarossa while Russia is busy in the east, Russia faces a two front war. Had the Soviet union not had the supplies from America during the ramped up lend lease, they would not have had the material to repeal the Nazi's. They would not be able to ramp up production in Siberia, because it would be a warzone.
I think with that scenario the USSR is off the map.
The USA can't declare war first. Roosevelt won in `1940 by promising to stay out of the war. He needed Pearl Harbor to get America into it.
I do think America would have eventually declared war, maybe another big sinking like the Lusitania but something would have happened. Even if Hitler never declared war on the US and Japan never attacks us, or the Philippines
the USA would have gone in eventually. The problem is, if the US went in too late could they have won?
Nazi Germany would have all of the USSR, and everything from France to the Aleutian islands to attack from.
It's a great thing that Hitler wasn't a real ally to the Japanese, it's a great thing they didn't plan like Hitler did with Mussolini. Had Germany and Japan had until say 45-46 before we were in the war, then the US could have lost.
I say the US, because had the US not entered, the allies were done. Lend Lease and all of japan being directed at us, saved the war for the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union in turn saved England by being so taxing on Hitler's forces (and of course the lend lease). So the only scenario would be a US defeat. Only possible with a US that stays out of the war longer and a true partnership between Japan and Germany.
Let's say Japan attacks Russia at Hitler's behest and cuts the trans siberian railroad and takes Vladivostok and cuts off Siberia. Then Hitler starts Barbarossa while Russia is busy in the east, Russia faces a two front war. Had the Soviet union not had the supplies from America during the ramped up lend lease, they would not have had the material to repeal the Nazi's. They would not be able to ramp up production in Siberia, because it would be a warzone.
I think with that scenario the USSR is off the map.
The USA can't declare war first. Roosevelt won in `1940 by promising to stay out of the war. He needed Pearl Harbor to get America into it.
I do think America would have eventually declared war, maybe another big sinking like the Lusitania but something would have happened. Even if Hitler never declared war on the US and Japan never attacks us, or the Philippines
the USA would have gone in eventually. The problem is, if the US went in too late could they have won?
Nazi Germany would have all of the USSR, and everything from France to the Aleutian islands to attack from.
It's a great thing that Hitler wasn't a real ally to the Japanese, it's a great thing they didn't plan like Hitler did with Mussolini. Had Germany and Japan had until say 45-46 before we were in the war, then the US could have lost.
I say the US, because had the US not entered, the allies were done. Lend Lease and all of japan being directed at us, saved the war for the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union in turn saved England by being so taxing on Hitler's forces (and of course the lend lease). So the only scenario would be a US defeat. Only possible with a US that stays out of the war longer and a true partnership between Japan and Germany.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 9:39 pm to beerJeep
another thing is it's hard to tell because the US military wasn't as taxed as the others. Wermacht and Luftwaffe veterans could not get the concept of American pilot and bomber crews getting rotated out after a set amount of missions. The soldiers couldn't grasp that American soldiers had a set military term. They were in it until death or victory. All the axis and USSR armies and air forces were like that.
Meanwhile the US had millions and millions of people back home.
The US had strict entry policies to the military, those other countries gave you a gun if you could hold it.
They had large armies, but had no reserves. The US could have taken a loss in the numbers of the Soviet loss and still went on. We had a much larger population then as now.
So it's hard to tell if the US could have been defeated in a traditional war.
Would we have gone for the bomb? The Manhattan project did start in 1939, and Germany abandoned their research in 1942 to move to rocket research as a priority.
A lot of historians think they could have built a bomb and go with the "Heseinberg Version" that they didn't think a bomb was needed for the war and it would take too much to get the material, so they didn't really try to build a bomnb seriously. ( Vanderbilt.edu link - The German nuclera project.)
The US had places it could build gigantic secret factories to build a very small amount of substance, for Billions of dollars. Germany didn't, now if they had the money, and the places to do it, they didn't have anywhere that couldn't be bombed. We did. That alone made the difference. Where would Germany have built an Oak Ridge?
Meanwhile the US had millions and millions of people back home.
The US had strict entry policies to the military, those other countries gave you a gun if you could hold it.
They had large armies, but had no reserves. The US could have taken a loss in the numbers of the Soviet loss and still went on. We had a much larger population then as now.
So it's hard to tell if the US could have been defeated in a traditional war.
Would we have gone for the bomb? The Manhattan project did start in 1939, and Germany abandoned their research in 1942 to move to rocket research as a priority.
A lot of historians think they could have built a bomb and go with the "Heseinberg Version" that they didn't think a bomb was needed for the war and it would take too much to get the material, so they didn't really try to build a bomnb seriously. ( Vanderbilt.edu link - The German nuclera project.)
The US had places it could build gigantic secret factories to build a very small amount of substance, for Billions of dollars. Germany didn't, now if they had the money, and the places to do it, they didn't have anywhere that couldn't be bombed. We did. That alone made the difference. Where would Germany have built an Oak Ridge?
Posted on 1/19/17 at 9:47 pm to athenslife101
Depends.
Germany had a very real chance of persuading the US to not get involved due to the pre-war popularity of isolationism and the fact that there were lots of German immigrants who maybe didn't like Hitler but didn't favor bombing the Fatherland either.
However, the British had a very active campaign to try to keep the US on their side and reelect FDR. LINK
But FDR was a very canny political operator and made sure that the population would not be willing to settle for less than complete victory.
Germany had a very real chance of persuading the US to not get involved due to the pre-war popularity of isolationism and the fact that there were lots of German immigrants who maybe didn't like Hitler but didn't favor bombing the Fatherland either.
However, the British had a very active campaign to try to keep the US on their side and reelect FDR. LINK
But FDR was a very canny political operator and made sure that the population would not be willing to settle for less than complete victory.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 9:49 pm to goldennugget
quote:
A lot of what Germany did was in defense or in retaliation, they were rarely the aggressor
I know you are trolling, it's almost funny how aggressive Germany was before they got defeated. Germany was founded in 1871 after the Franco-Prussian war, which was right after the Austro-Prussian war, which itself was right after the Denmark-Prussian war. All three victories, all three they started.
Then they started both World Wars, and I'm leaving out their brutality in Africa in the 1900's. They had the first concentration camps and mass killings there. I think it's around 100,000 Namibians they killed.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 9:50 pm to TigerintheNO
Hitler wasnt obligated to help Japan but he couldnt.blatantly take sides against them. He needed the threat of a Japanese attack in the Far East to tie down Russian troops.
Plus the US and Germany were already in a de facto war in the North Atlantic. Hitler made FDRs job easier but FDR would have figured out a way to get us involved in Europe.
Plus the US and Germany were already in a de facto war in the North Atlantic. Hitler made FDRs job easier but FDR would have figured out a way to get us involved in Europe.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News