Started By
Message

re: Was the allies winning WW 2 inevitable?

Posted on 1/20/17 at 7:18 am to
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 7:18 am to
quote:

FDR knew about Pearl Harbor and let it happen so we could get involved.


That is completely nuts. Geez I get tired of this.

Wrong war.

From about November 1, 1941 the USN was actively hunting German submarines. Four US warships were torpedoed in this period, Kearny, Greer, Reuben James and Truxton. There was a USN officer in the lend-lease PBY seaplane that spotted the Bismarck in May of 1941. US pilots including Hub Zemke were in the Soviet Union training Russian pilots to fly the P-40 on 12/7/41. FDR was TOTALLY focused on fighting the Germans, not the Japanese.

The CAMCO operation was moving forward to aid the Chinese, also known as the AVG. But that was tiny.



On Monday, November 14, 1938 President Roosevelt summoned a number of key military advisers to what Eric Hammel has called possibly the most important single meeting in modern world history. The president wanted a large force of -offensive- airplanes. The Air Corps had 12 working strategic bombers and several hundred tactical bombers of dubious utility. FDR told his advisers he wanted 20,000 Army Air Corps aircraft in service and a capacity to build 24,000 a year. For the day these numbers were simply fantastic.

FDR was a brilliant and far sighted leader, and he wanted to crush the Nazis.

The reason that FDR dropped his neutral stance that he did have at one point was because his advisers told him that a United States of Europe under the Nazis would be very bad for the economy. Germany First.

Not only that, in the Ken Burns series on the Roosevelts he talks about where General Marshall got tired of trying to work with the Brits in the 1942 time frame. He suggested a refocus on the Pacific. FDR told him no. Helping the USSR was imperative. Get to it.
This post was edited on 1/20/17 at 7:56 am
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 7:29 am to
quote:

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.


That might have worked.

The Germans and Japanese really working together was the great what-not-if in the war. Had the Japs applied pressure through the Arabian Sea and up into Iran, it would have been a big fricking mess. After the big coup of their opening war conquests, they really didn't know what to do. The Army was completely opposed to attacking Australia, they didn't have the troops for that. But the Navy pushed down that way and wound up fighting the Americans in the Solomons, where they got bled white.

The Jap Navy and Jap Army had headquarters 100 yards apart on the same street at Rabaul. Even when things started going to shite on them, they didn't even take tea together.
This post was edited on 1/20/17 at 7:31 am
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 7:34 am to
quote:

The Germans should have started Barbarossa (Russian campaign) a month earlier. The weather was good enough to conduct operations.


There was a huge force of Panzers southwest of Moscow that sat for weeks doing nothing in the high summer. Hitler dithered on whether they should attack Moscow or head for the oil fields. That delay was fatal for the Germans.
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 7:38 am to
quote:

Had Germany had the US' supply chain they would have been that much scarier. Germany still moved some material and troops by horse, even then.


Despite all the propaganda films, the German Army artillery was 90% horse drawn until the end of the war. Where US Army infantry companies had a jeep assigned, the German infantry companies had a cart that two men could pull.
Posted by Milk
central
Member since May 2010
1042 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 7:53 am to
Its doubtful germany or any country could have maintained control of such a vast area. Lets say they controlled russia, all of europe and gained control of the USA. Eventually they would have lost to guerilla tactics or at least had to withdraw. Thats too broad an area to control with a finite number of troops. Morale would start to deteriorate as troops would always be on assignment. Eventually there would be a financial colapse, because war is great for kick starting an economy, but is not the best way to maintain it.
Posted by Spaceman Spiff
Savannah
Member since Sep 2012
17503 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:21 am to
They wouldn't have had to gain control of the US and keep troops there. Just impossible. However, all they needed to do was stay out of Russia, sink GBR, and fortify Europe proper and control Gibraltar. GBR was just about done before they switched tactics. Do that, ring the island with Uboats and let them wither. No way material could get in, therefore, no US bases.
Posted by TbirdSpur2010
ALAMO CITY
Member since Dec 2010
134026 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:30 am to
quote:

US getting involved was always a foregone conclusion. FDR knew about Pearl Harbor and let it happen so we could get involved.


I didn't think you could top that gem, but I was wrong:

quote:

A lot of what Germany did was in defense or in retaliation, they were rarely the aggressor

Posted by 504Voodoo
New Orleans
Member since Aug 2012
13534 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:35 am to
quote:

Nazi problem was they tried to expand too fast and bit off more than they could chew 

But US getting involved was always a foregone conclusion. FDR knew about Pearl Harbor and let it happen so we could get involved.



I know see that your trolling knows no bounds and it ventures across all the boards of TD. That takes some commitment to character.
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
35048 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:45 am to
quote:

Hey can you give me some good WW2 books?


"The tigers are burning" is a Soviet pov of the battle of kursk. Great read and gives some insight to the scale of this battle. The largest single day oof armored tank combat took place during the battle of kursk.


Someone really hates the battle of kursk to downvote all my post instantly in this thread
This post was edited on 1/20/17 at 9:00 am
Posted by Honky Lips
Member since Dec 2015
2828 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:56 am to
quote:

Was the allies winning WW 2 inevitable?

maybe you should be on a grammar kick
Posted by StrongBackWeakMind
Member since May 2014
22650 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 8:58 am to
What is the proper way to word that question?
Posted by zatetic
Member since Nov 2015
5677 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 9:26 am to
Adolf Hitler Was Right! 6 minutes

Once Hitler threw off the chains of their old banking system war was going to happen. But there shouldn't be a mistake about what the war was, it was a war against globalist communists for Germany. Germany's culture had been obliterated in Weimar Germany. People were suffering and life was terrible for the Germans. Also, Germans were being terrorized in their former German areas that were now belonged to other countries after WWI treaty.

Hitler's biggest mistake was liking Britain too much. He identified the English as like Germans and so he tried to avoid war with them. But Churchill and his financiers did not care for that, and as Churchill has stated, this is a war to annihilate the Germans from ever becoming a great people. Under Hitler Germany was becoming a great country. Comparing the GDPs of Nazi Germany to Great Britain illustrated the concern of Churchill greatly. Without the constraints of usury finance Nazi Germany was skyrocketing. And this is before any war stuff started. It would have been in England's interest to align with Germany, they could have kept their Empire and stopped the debasement of their culture, but here we are today and the whole of Europe is a mess.

Italy was a drain. Germany should have probably just taken over Italy's army and lead it.

Rumors are Japan was not the first choice for Hitler on that side of the world. He supposedly wanted nationalist China to help take on Russia, but China was a mess.

After the initial war successes they diverted funds from the air force and that obviously cost the Germans dearly.

He never wanted to enslave the slavs. Again, the war was with the communists and the people running the communist show were mostly Jews.

Hitler was a dreamer 3 minutes

Haavara Agreement
This post was edited on 1/20/17 at 10:03 am
Posted by Champagne
Already Conquered USA.
Member since Oct 2007
48417 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 9:41 am to
quote:

They basically didn't switch to a war footing until after the war was lost.


That is true. However, to make things even worse, there are some important reasons to conclude that the German economy NEVER fully switch to a war-footing.

Some reasons to conclude this:

-- Women were never integrated into the "War" economy

-- Gauleiters had their own "fiefdoms" and strongly resisted national efforts to cancel their local construction projects and take away their construction work forces. That kept local materiel and local manpower from being used for the war effort. Hitler gave in to his Gauleiters' wishes in this regard. Speer was over-ruled and IN FACT lost his "influence war" with the Gauleiters. Speer wanted the authority to take the local war materiels and manpower. The Gauleiters revolted against him and went to Hitler. Hitler sided with the Gauleiters.

-- German factory assembly methods in too many cases were not modernized on the "Henry Ford assembly line" method. For example, the Tiger tanks were manufactured using an old fashioned "craftsman" method that was more like "make one tank at a time" than a true assembly line
Posted by zatetic
Member since Nov 2015
5677 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 10:02 am to
quote:

-- Women were never integrated into the "War" economy


Adolf Hitler on feminism 6 minutes
Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
69108 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 10:14 am to
Another point I liked at that time, was after France surrendered. Churchill pleaded to the US to help repeal the coming invasion of England. FDR rebuked and told the PM of Canada that if Europe falls they will be in this together against Europe. Canada of course told england. Churchill in response to prove he was serious about stopping the spread of Nazism at all cost, ordered the free french fleet that had not surrendered to england destroyed in harbor in North Africa. Killing thousands of French.
This action for some reason or another, got the US to ramp up military aid to England.
It showed the US that Churchill was a serious fighter and a man who meant business.

I think lost of history is the tension between the US and England over the empire. FDR wanted the UK to free its colonies after the war. Had FDR not died when he did, or had the Democrats not forced Truman into the VP position, the world after the war would have been drastically different.

Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 10:18 am to
quote:

That is true. However, to make things even worse, there are some important reasons to conclude that the German economy NEVER fully switch to a war-footing.


There is still a huge row over who hurt the Germans worse, the RAF or the USAAF.

Best take is that the RAF have very much the less effect. That is what the Germans say. The Brits got shot to pieces trying some daylight raids early on so they switched to night bombing. They just decided that ‘dehousing’ German workers was a good policy because it was all they could do. They did little to diminish German war production.

The Americans didn’t do much better until:

1. They had a force on hand large enough to properly whack the Germans; about 900 heavy bombers in England on hand from 1/1/44. 2,000 by VE day. Plus the 15th AF in Italy.
2. The new CG General Spaatz decided to focus on Oil targets after 3/1/44. Oil turned out to be the bottleneck. The Germans produced 7,000 fighter planes in July 1944 but had little or no fuel for them. By December their Ardennes offensive had to count on capturing gasoline from American stores.

The GAF needed 175K tons of fuel a month. In 9/44 they received less than 1K tons. With the rainy weather and herculean effort the Germans did recoup some POL production in the fall/winter of 1944. The RAF didn't really operate against Oil targets much. German cities were the preferred target.

The Americans also did something the RAF could not participate in: Destroying the GAF day fighters before OVERLORD. The American were hitting targets the Germans had to defend, Oil refineries and factories of all types. The losses among the German fighter force were catastrophic.

This post was edited on 1/20/17 at 10:20 am
Posted by Kcrad
Diamondhead
Member since Nov 2010
54954 posts
Posted on 1/20/17 at 10:23 am to
quote:

Not exactly on topic. I took a 400 level course taught by Stephen Ambrose at UNO.

We had to buy 5 books, all written by him. Come on, man.

But he did bring in this man for a week long lecture. Hans von Luck

He said 3 weeks before the attack on Moscow his Recon unit was 5 miles from Moscow and he could see the Kremlin. He was a Hauptmann (Captain) at the time and he begged the Generals to attack now.


They refused, because Hitler set the date of the attack and would not change his mind.

He told the class in no uncertain terms, if the Central Army would've attacked at that time Moscow was their's and the Soviet counter-attack would've been destroyed to the man.

Also, von Luck said the Soviet troops used in the counter-attack were green Oriental troops, that would've been mowed down like Schafe.
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 1/22/17 at 6:17 am to
quote:

On Monday, November 14, 1938 President Roosevelt summoned a number of key military advisers to what Eric Hammel has called possibly the most important single meeting in modern world history. The president wanted a large force of -offensive- airplanes. The Air Corps had 12 working strategic bombers and several hundred tactical bombers of dubious utility. FDR told his advisers he wanted 20,000 Army Air Corps aircraft in service and a capacity to build 24,000 a year. For the day these numbers were simply fantastic.


I read recently that FDR asked General Marshall what he thought of this plan and General Marshall said he didn't like it at all. FDR was a bit nonplussed but in 1940 he picked Marshall for Chief of Staff.

FDR was awesome.
Posted by FightinTigersDammit
Louisiana North
Member since Mar 2006
34715 posts
Posted on 1/22/17 at 7:49 am to
quote:

As long as the U.S. was supplying the Soviet and British armies with food and ammunition, victory was innevitable.


This is the real story. Once the US industrial machine started rolling, it was just a matter of time.
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 1/22/17 at 8:00 am to
quote:

This is the real story. Once the US industrial machine started rolling, it was just a matter of time.


The Japanese surely knew in 1940 we were building 7 fast battleships to go with the 15 BB's we already had and 18 heavy carriers to go with the 6 we already had [Ranger and Wasp were not heavy carriers]. They just didn't care.

first pageprev pagePage 5 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram