- 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: If Germany had developed a the Atomic bomb first who would they have used it on?
Posted on 6/23/16 at 4:25 pm to Guess
Posted on 6/23/16 at 4:25 pm to Guess
They'd have still had to produce a large heavy bomber to deliver it. They did some limited work on heavy bombers in the war but never really tried producing heavy bombers. That's something that's always baffled me about the German thinking in WWII.
1
Posted on 6/23/16 at 4:54 pm to Old Sarge
Did you just recently start watching "The Man in the High Castle"?
Posted on 6/23/16 at 5:24 pm to foshizzle
How about college station?
Posted on 6/23/16 at 5:25 pm to Old Sarge
Cleveland would have been at the top of the list I'm sure.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 5:33 pm to Darth_Vader
Did they need a large heavy bomber? Machinery was not a reason they lost.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 6:15 pm to Old Sarge
Russia. Moscow.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 6:27 pm to Old Sarge
Manhattan. At least according to Wolfenstein.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 6:30 pm to Old Sarge
In Fatherland they nuked NYC after we nuked Hiroshima. Basically told us to step off and let them have Europe.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 6:31 pm to Old Sarge
They would have used it on us, that was their only chance of winning.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 6:44 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
Great Britian before the D day invasion?
Duh, yeah.
If they had it that early, absolutely.
Stalingrad shows how little the bomb would have impressed the Russians. They were in it to the death. Nuke London and the Brits probably cave fairly quickly after Manchester, Liverpool, etc. And the US has no where to stage out of or the will.
And yes, the Germans would have found a way to deliver nukes to Britain. Very short distance even without air superiority.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 7:44 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
He'd have bombed Moscow for sure if possible. The question though would be how would he deliver a nuclear device to either city?
An atomic cannon. Germany had an artillery piece in WW1 that could shoot at least 75+ miles.
Get within that distance of Moscow or Stalingrad then maybe.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 7:48 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Stalingrad
This
Posted on 6/23/16 at 8:03 pm to Old Sarge
Dropping a nuke on England would've effectively stopped the Brits in their tracks. They would've brokered a peace deal.
Stalin, on the other hand, gave no fricks about his people and Hitler viewed Russians as subhuman. It would've turned into a shite-show.
Stalin, on the other hand, gave no fricks about his people and Hitler viewed Russians as subhuman. It would've turned into a shite-show.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 8:12 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
Moscow to bring the war back to a single front quickly?
I honestly don't think so. Someone from Leningrad would have taken over fairly immediately I would think. London though would be unthinkable. That was the city that brought the allies together. That would almost certainly be the first target. As far as targets are concerned:
1) London
2) Moscow
3) New York
4) Stalingrad
5) Leningrad
6) DC
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 8:20 pm
Posted on 6/23/16 at 8:13 pm to Old Sarge
Russia. They saw Commies and Slavs as subhuman.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 8:16 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Hitler actually admired the British. On the other hand he considered Russians as sub-human dogs.
He'd have bombed Moscow for sure if possible. The question though would be how would he deliver a nuclear device to either city?
Oh I agree, but strategically it wouldn't make sense to bomb Moscow over London. Without London the British would have immediately surrendered. Moscow I think the Russians would keep fighting, especially knowing the genocide that awaited them. Just admiring the British and Americans I don't think would deter Hitler all that much from nuking them if he thought that it would defeat them. I think if Hitler nuked London and won, he would have done something similar we did to Japan, with a fascist twist of course.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 8:18 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Manhattan. At least according to Wolfenstein.
All that would serve is to cripple the American economy. Plus I think Chicago and Philadelphia would be capable of taking up New York's banners. London and Moscow would do much more for German victory than nuking New York would.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 8:25 pm to Old Sarge
Stalingrad
Moscow
Leningrad
Then I believe they would have helped Japan with China and Australia and Italy with the Middle East. If they helped Japan then the US would have to shift more focus to the pacific.
Image had Germany, Italy, and Japan controlled Europe, Asia, Australia, and Northern Africa. They would have been almost unstoppable especially if they invaded South America and started working their way north.
Moscow
Leningrad
Then I believe they would have helped Japan with China and Australia and Italy with the Middle East. If they helped Japan then the US would have to shift more focus to the pacific.
Image had Germany, Italy, and Japan controlled Europe, Asia, Australia, and Northern Africa. They would have been almost unstoppable especially if they invaded South America and started working their way north.
Posted on 6/24/16 at 12:03 am to tigerman03
quote:Forcing Britain out of the war would have dramatically altered the outcome of the war.
Dropping a nuke on England would've effectively stopped the Brits in their tracks. They would've brokered a peace deal.
This post was edited on 6/24/16 at 12:04 am
Posted on 6/24/16 at 12:07 am to Old Sarge
I vote for Tuscaloosa.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News