Started By
Message

re: In hindsight was it a mistake for the US to ally with the Soviet Union during WW2.

Posted on 2/26/23 at 10:31 am to
Posted by Madcajunmule
Member since Sep 2022
2 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 10:31 am to
Payton wasn’t assassinated. He died in a car wreck near Mannheim Germany.
Posted by Cheese Grits
Wherever I lay my hat is my home
Member since Apr 2012
58743 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 10:40 am to
quote:

This is hyperbole to the max.


How old are you?

Dunkirk was an aberration that saved 350,000 soldiers to fight again.

If England is out, Germany focuses on Russia and win there. Maybe they stop with Europe, Africa, and Asia but odds are not good as Germany + Japan would leave only the Americas and we were woefully behind in military technology. Our armor was crap, we had no jets, and while we built quantity it was not quality.

Consider this ...

The Russians did not want our tanks, just our trucks
The Space Race was fueled with German scientists
The Nuclear race was fueled with German scientists
The Me 262 was designed prior to the start of WW II, Hitler was thankfully an idiot in how he developed and used it

Even with captured German Panthers it took the US army till the 50's and 60's to build a tank than could match it.


World War II was about oil, there is a reason the early part of the war focused on the Pacific (south China Seas = Oil) and Africa (North Africa and Middle East = Oil).

My uncles fought in every theatre in WW II including one surviving the Bataan Death March and one serving in The Hump while most served in Europe and the Pacific. My uncle who served in Africa told me of making the captured Germans piss in the radiators to conserve water. The German 88's could cut through US armor there like butter.
Posted by RollTide1987
Augusta, GA
Member since Nov 2009
68311 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 11:00 am to
quote:

How old are you?


This hardly matters.

You asserted that if it wasn't for the Soviet Union, we'd all be speaking German. This ignores political and military realities from that era. Hitler had no desire whatsoever to conquer Great Britain or the United States. In fact, Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that he respected the British Empire and believed that it was a stabilizing force in the world. If those 335,000 British and French soldiers are captured instead of evacuated at Dunkirk, worst case scenario for the Allies is that Hitler makes peace with the British and allows them to keep their empire.

But let's say for argument's sake that England is forced to unconditionally surrender and give up their sovereignty to Nazi Germany. Let's then say for argument's sake that the Germans handle the Soviet Union and then turn their sights on the United States. Guess what? The Kriegsmarine's naval doctrine from 1939 onward was based almost entirely on commerce raiding. That means more U-Boats and fewer surface vessels, with almost no troop transports and no aircraft carriers to speak of.

How do you transport an invasion force across the broad expanse of the Atlantic Ocean if you are Germany? Not only do you have the U.S. Navy to deal with (which even in 1939 was bigger and more formidable than the Kriegsmarine), but you also have the remnants of the Royal Navy fighting it in this hypothetical scenario as they aren't just going to up and surrender their navy in the event of a British surrender. They would have most likely taken to sea and interred in the United States.
This post was edited on 2/26/23 at 11:02 am
Posted by jeffsdad
Member since Mar 2007
23331 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 11:14 am to
You know, there was an alternative to 1. supply Russia or 2. dont supply Russia (with materials).,

We could have delayed the supplies a few more months (I'm guessing at time length). Germany would have probably gotten east of Moscow and maybe hurt Russia enough to where they could not have become such a strong force afterwards. I mean , look at what happened, they ran over the German forces once they got started. I know this a simplistic look but we supplied the materials that Russia used to beat Germany, delaying that would have had serious consequences to Russia. OR, given them less materials to begin with.
Posted by jeffsdad
Member since Mar 2007
23331 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 11:27 am to
It seems we wanted them to be a pit bull, and we made them into a male lion.
Posted by tide06
Member since Oct 2011
16572 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 11:43 am to
quote:

Most of the fighting in the east, and practically all the civilian casualties, took place in what is now Ukraine and Belarus.

What happened to Ukraine before and during the war over a 20 year period is hard to fathom.

First the Soviets come in and kill millions through imposed collectivization and Stalin even considers shipping the entire population off to Siberia according to many sources.

WWII intervenes and you have the Nazis come in and are initially welcomed with open arms but then things change when the Nazis start exterminating all the Jews and wiping entire cities off the map while shipping the remaining population off to slave camps in occupied Europe where most die of disease, starvation and bombing.

Then those who survive have to deal with post combat evaluations where commissars come in and execute those suspected of cooperating with the nazi occupiers.

That country was basically depopulated over a 20-30 year period.

I’m not sure anyone but the Chinese or possibly the Koreans had a worse go of it in the 20th century than Ukraine. Maybe some African nations would be in the running?
Posted by Cheese Grits
Wherever I lay my hat is my home
Member since Apr 2012
58743 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 12:15 pm to
quote:

This hardly matters.


Obviously it does

Hitler had the Royal Family snowed, not Churchill. They said Windsor abdicated for Wallace but the reality is he was a Nazi sympathizer and the Empire took him out gracefully in the public eye. This is not some revisionist history but from folks who raised me and lived through it.

If you are so sure Hitler was OK leaving England alone, perhaps you never heard of Operation Sea Lion?

In September 1939, the successful German invasion of Poland infringed on both a French and a British alliance with Poland and both countries declared war on Germany. On 9 October, Hitler's "Directive No. 6 for the Conduct of the War" planned an offensive to defeat these allies and "win as much territory as possible in Holland, Belgium, and northern France to serve as a base for the successful prosecution of the air and sea war against England".
Posted by SteelerBravesDawg
Member since Sep 2020
43337 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 12:18 pm to
quote:

FDR admired Stalin and Stalinism

Uh, no.
Posted by SteelerBravesDawg
Member since Sep 2020
43337 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 12:23 pm to
quote:

without the Russians we would all be speaking German now.

QFT.
Posted by Cheese Grits
Wherever I lay my hat is my home
Member since Apr 2012
58743 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 12:30 pm to
quote:

Roosevelt sure as hell did not admire Stalinism.


Correct

What folks perceived via controlled media and what folks think based on that media is not the same.

Spanish Flu was covered up by world media at the time because a World War was going on. World War II had a understanding media who allowed the privacy needed to wage war. Imagine if modern media was around for WW I and WW II?
Posted by doubleb
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
40030 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 12:32 pm to
quote:

This is hyperbole to the max. Hitler did not have anything close to the capabilities needed to launch an invasion fleet across the Atlantic Ocean, land on the beaches of a heavily defended U.S. coastline, and sustain and protect a logistical supply line that would have stretched across thousands of miles of vast ocean.

In fact he couldn’t cross the English Channel to invade England. He wasn’t going to invade the US.
Posted by hubertcumberdale
Member since Nov 2009
6704 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 12:49 pm to
quote:

In hindsight was it a mistake for the US to ally with the Soviet Union during WW2.



what an awful fricking take
Posted by grizzlylongcut
Member since Sep 2021
12496 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 12:52 pm to
quote:

We were fighting Hitler. Literally Hitler.


Stalin was every bit as bad if not worse than Hitler.
This post was edited on 2/26/23 at 12:53 pm
Posted by Cheese Grits
Wherever I lay my hat is my home
Member since Apr 2012
58743 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 12:53 pm to
quote:

In fact he couldn’t cross the English Channel to invade England.


Did you live through this time?


Had Hitler waited to invade Russia till after he had finished off England he would have had only 1 front to fight on. The weather allowed Dunkirk to be successful and Hitler was not the military genius. Germans were well ahead in technology while the rest of the world was fighting with WW I technology and equipment.

Play armchair QB here for a moment and imagine Hitler makes the smart moves


#1 Invades Poland and stops on that front
#2 Eliminates France
#3 Takes North Africa (and the Middle East) - securing oil
#4 Takes England (British had no oil, BP was their oil in Africa / Middle East)

America was isolationist and Henry Ford was a fan of Hitler's

Hitler secures oil in the European / African sphere (continents)
Japan secures oil in the Asian sphere (South China Seas / Royal Dutch Shell oil)

You have 4 spheres of oil by then

Nazi = Europe & Africa (Total / France & BP / English are now German)
Communist = Russia (self sustaining)
Japan = South China Seas
Americas = North America (US + CAN) and Central + South America

#5 Germany invades Russia on a single front, Japan invades Russia on a single front

At that point how long before Germany takes the Americas and with just 2 left, how long before they turn on Japan.


Keep in mind the Germans were ahead on ...
Jets
Rockets
Nuclear weapons

While we crow about the Stealth Bomber, the Germans had the Horten Ho 229 on the drawing boards at the start of WW II
Posted by doubleb
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
40030 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 1:01 pm to
quote:

Did you live through this time?


No, but I know that Germany didn’t take England out. It wasn’t as if they didn’t try either. They went after them with everything they had at the time.

Now you come back with a series of what ifs. What ifs don’t make it true.

Germany wasn’t going to invade the US and impose their culture on the US.
Posted by hubertcumberdale
Member since Nov 2009
6704 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 1:04 pm to
quote:

Germany wasn’t going to invade the US and impose their culture on the US.



how can you say that? if germany takes over europe and japan takes asia, you dont think thats a possibility?

ETA: lack of oil resources is one major factors that crushed the nazis/blitz, if they take russia/the balkans, they have all the oil they would want/could handle.
This post was edited on 2/26/23 at 1:06 pm
Posted by Cheese Grits
Wherever I lay my hat is my home
Member since Apr 2012
58743 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 1:08 pm to
quote:

They went after them with everything they had at the time.


No, they did not

Look at the actual history ...

06/22/1941 - Germans start their 2nd front with Operation Barbarossa
12/07/1941 - Japan attacks Pearl Harbor

If they did operation Sea Lion prior to operation Barbarossa, England is toast before the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor. If the men and material for Barbossa is used on England first, they take England.

Hitler may have been a military idiot (thankfully) but his staff was not
Posted by RollTide1987
Augusta, GA
Member since Nov 2009
68311 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 1:10 pm to
quote:

perhaps you never heard of Operation Sea Lion?


I have heard of Operation Sea Lion and this just goes to show you the impossibility of a successful invasion of the United States by Nazi Germany. Hitler's invasion fleet couldn't get their shite together when the enemy's beaches were less than 60 miles away across the English Channel. Think about the logistical nightmare preparations for a hypothetical transoceanic invasion of the United States would have been.

A German invasion of the U.S. would have never succeeded.

quote:

They said Windsor abdicated for Wallace but the reality is he was a Nazi sympathizer and the Empire took him out gracefully in the public eye. This is not some revisionist history but from folks who raised me and lived through it.


This ain't got shite to do with shite.
This post was edited on 2/26/23 at 1:11 pm
Posted by molsusports
Member since Jul 2004
36661 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 1:21 pm to
Are there any people in Germany who refer to World War II as the war of western aggression?
Posted by Eli Goldfinger
Member since Sep 2016
32785 posts
Posted on 2/26/23 at 1:24 pm to
Should have let Germany & Russia bloody each other and then attacked the winner after we were finished with Japan.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 6Next pagelast page

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

FacebookXInstagram