- 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: At full strength who was more powerful in ww2 Germany or US?
Posted on 11/2/21 at 1:51 pm to Stealth Matrix
Posted on 11/2/21 at 1:51 pm to Stealth Matrix
quote:
America never reached its' full strength in WW2. It didn't have to.
Google “90 division gamble.”
0
Posted on 11/2/21 at 2:49 pm to Tigeralum2008
quote:
Had Germany adopted a policy of containment of UK power they could have waited until their nuclear program was succesful. It would have been game set match for the Brits.
Hitler's fixation on Russia is what destroyed his dreams. He had the manpower to win in Western Europe. He should have hit Africa to secure oil and waited patiently until 1947. Germany had a HUGE technological advantage that grew wider every year.
Best writeup I've seen yet. His two biggest mistakes were switching targets when he had the battle of britain all but won, and Russia. Russia would have happened anyway, but that division cost Germany the war.
They would have had the bomb before us, I do believe. As you said, their tech was way ahead of anyone else's.
Posted on 11/2/21 at 3:01 pm to bdavids09
quote:
I'm curious if Germany never attacks Russia could the US have defeated Germany when they were at full strength?
The USA island hopped across the Pacific and tore the Jap military apart limb by limb until they lost the will to fight. The Japs were a much scarier opponent than the Germans simply because their soldiers wouldn't surrender and fought to the death.
If the USA could do that, then yeah, they could have beaten the Germans with no Soviet help.
Posted on 11/2/21 at 3:57 pm to Big Gorilla
quote:
If Germany doesn't attack Russia then yes, they would have owned all of western Europe before we even joined the war.
Did they not? The Axis controlled pretty much everything in western Europe besides the south of France by the end of June 1940. We didn't enter for another 18 months.
Posted on 11/2/21 at 5:32 pm to tigercross
quote:
Did they not? The Axis controlled pretty much everything in western Europe besides the south of France by the end of June 1940.
Except, you know, Britain, right?
Posted on 11/2/21 at 6:22 pm to VADawg
quote:
The USA island hopped across the Pacific and tore the Jap military apart limb by limb until they lost the will to fight. The Japs were a much scarier opponent than the Germans simply because their soldiers wouldn't surrender and fought to the death.
If the USA could do that, then yeah, they could have beaten the Germans with no Soviet help.
Island hopping effectively reduced the amount of fighting we had to do. As you recall, most engagements were naval, but there was a lot of island fighting. Island campaigns lasted a month at most.
The Japs were brutal but the Germans fought smarter.
This post was edited on 11/2/21 at 6:26 pm
Posted on 11/2/21 at 6:29 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Except, you know, Britain, right?
I don’t consider Britain part of Western Europe. I know there are many organisations that do, but Britain is a separate entity in my eyes. Cultural differences from the continent and all that. Just like Spain sometimes is not Western Europe
Posted on 11/2/21 at 8:27 pm to VADawg
quote:
The USA island hopped across the Pacific and tore the Jap military apart limb by limb until they lost the will to fight. The Japs were a much scarier opponent than the Germans simply because their soldiers wouldn't surrender and fought to the death.
If the USA could do that, then yeah, they could have beaten the Germans with no Soviet help.
If you take even the the slightest amount of time to understand the logistics required, you’d know our leaders agreed it’d be foolish to send more than 90 divisions overseas.
Assuming the USSR sits out, even if you consolidate all of our efforts on Germany, we still have nowhere near the supportable manpower needed to prevent them from possessing land superiority throughout the entire continent.
And this isn’t a slight against our armed forces. What we accomplished during WW2 is completely without pier.
But we never possessed 300 divisions. And even if we did, we never believed it would be possible to effectively supply such a force so far from home.
The Soviets saved Europe from the Nazi’s and we saved Europe from the Soviets. It’s as simple as that.
Posted on 11/2/21 at 8:37 pm to southdowns84
quote:
The Soviets saved Europe from the Nazi’s
But opportunistically did a lot of fricked up shite along the way that gets largely overlooked. USSR was almost as bad as Nazi Germany.
Posted on 11/2/21 at 9:19 pm to bdavids09
I think proved that already
Posted on 11/2/21 at 10:41 pm to Keep Stirring
quote:
Two words: Manhattan Project
All thanks, in part, to some Jews who fled Germany.
Posted on 11/2/21 at 10:44 pm to bdavids09
The farm my father in law grew up on near Hathaway, used German POW's at harvest time to bring reap and shock the rice stalks. One of them told him that they had never ever seen so much food at meal time, and no way that America could lose if everyone had this much to eat while sustaining armies in the field
Posted on 11/2/21 at 10:45 pm to bdavids09
Ask Dan Carlin
Posted on 11/2/21 at 11:16 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:Bingo. Thank you.
Were we not also in the Pacific as well?
Posted on 11/3/21 at 5:01 am to Havoc
quote:
USSR was almost as bad as Nazi Germany.
Russia was worse
Posted on 11/3/21 at 7:54 am to Spaceman Spiff
quote:
Russia was worse
A) Russsia is and was worse
B) the germans were not even looking to build a bomb and did not feel that nuclear fusion would help in any way of ending the war and really only looked to build a reactor. They were years away, didnt have the resources to build a bomb and prolly would never have at the time unless they conquered Russia or never attacked them and took over the ME and north africa.
C) United States never reached full strength
D) we would have destroyed germany if they are the only ones we had to fight. Once we learned how to find and destroy U-boats it was game over.
E) if we are not fighting Japan, all of our naval and air resources would have tore Germany a new a-hole. We didnt need the 300 divisions they had.
F) Even with fighting japan and hypothetical Russia is never attacked, we had the industrial ability and naval ability to essentially starve Germany out. we could have sat there and bombed and bombed and bombed for years until they gave in. Did we have to invade japan? no, we realized very quickly that armies didnt mean nearly as much as owning the Air and Sea. Its why today we are undefeatable.
Posted on 11/3/21 at 7:56 am to Havoc
quote:
But opportunistically did a lot of fricked up shite along the way that gets largely overlooked. USSR was almost as bad as Nazi Germany.
No argument there. Soviets were bad dudes. Stalin is probably worse than Hitler based on kill count.
Posted on 11/3/21 at 9:37 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
All thanks, in part, to some Jews who fled Germany.
And, heavily thanks to an Italian who fled Fascist Italy.
Posted on 11/3/21 at 9:41 am to bdavids09
Full strength hypothetically? Or full strength actually?
Hypothetically, on paper, U.S. by a million (resources, population, geographic location)
Reality, it is Germany by a million. Dudes were unstoppable. Conquering the world is unsustainable.
Hypothetically, on paper, U.S. by a million (resources, population, geographic location)
Reality, it is Germany by a million. Dudes were unstoppable. Conquering the world is unsustainable.
Page 6 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News