- 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: Would it have been better if Germany would have won WW1? The First One.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:33 am to Feral
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:33 am to Feral
quote:
However, one thing to take into consideration is how the Germans were not exactly hospitable occupiers, and German brutality towards conquered territory and citizenry didn't just start with the Nazis.
At that time in history, the Law of Reprisal was well recognized. Under Reprisal, if the occupied civilian populace resorted to illegal terror attacks such as kidnapping and assassination or conducting attacks clothed in civilian clothes, Reprisal was allowed by the occupying power.
Even in 1914, the local civilian populace in Belgium were, some of them, bearing arms and shooting at German soldiers and German police from windows and in other technically illegal ways. This also happened in France to a lesser extent.
I agree that the German reprisals were way too harsh, but, it is true that the legal notion of Reprisal indeed did and does exist.
0
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:37 am to Cold Cous Cous
quote:
A beat-down France gets testy and starts seizing "traditional" French lands in NW Italy, Catalonia, and finally invades French-speaking Belgium
Loads of fun, not sure if realistic.
Not realistic:
Official French Battle Ensign-
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:40 am to Adam4LSU
quote:
This. The US was shite before WW1 in terms of military and economic power.
Compared to who? "In 1910 UK vehicle production was 14,000 units." LINK
US auto production in 1910:
quote:
Ford 32,053
Buick 30,525
Willys-Overland 15,598
Studebaker 15,020
Cadillac 10,039
Maxwell 10,000
Brush 10,000
REO 6588
LINK
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:44 am to Cold Cous Cous
Not just raw numbers of production but the way we produced machinery.
We were building a bunch of Ford tractors and combines at the same time as the auto industry took off.
Our factories were large-scale facilities compared to especially the UK but European countries in general.
We were building a bunch of Ford tractors and combines at the same time as the auto industry took off.
Our factories were large-scale facilities compared to especially the UK but European countries in general.
This post was edited on 5/11/16 at 10:45 am
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:47 am to Adam4LSU
quote:
This. The US was shite before WW1 in terms of military and economic power.
Before WWI our army was small. Course we felt no need for an army since we had two huge oceans between us and any potential enemy. What we had though was a navy. Only Great Britain & Germany had bigger navies than our own...
Naval Strengths Aug. 1914
As for being an economic power on the world stage prior to WWI....
Not even Great Britain, then at the height of it's worldwide empire, had a larger economy than the United States in 1914. In fact, even at the start of WWI, the USA was the world's largest economy.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:14 am to soccerfüt
quote:
Not realistic: Official French Battle Ensign-
I'm pretty sure you're joking but this is a very common misconception. Truth be told, the French are (or were) some of the most fanatical fighters on the planet, willing to suffer losses on a scale we as a country cannot comprehend. Look at it this way, here's what they lost in WWI...
Killed: 1.3 million
Wounded/missing: 6.1 million
(that represents almost 75% of their entire army in WWI.) LINK
And then there is WWII. Yes, Germany overran France in about 6 weeks. But the idea this campaign was a walkover by the Germans over the French is totally incorrect. Here's the German casualty figures for the Battle of France. Remember, this took place over a time span of only roughly 6 weeks...
Germany
Total Casualties: 157,621 (27,000 dead)
Aircraft lost: 1,236
Tanks lost: 795
(To give some perspective, the German lost more men and material in the Battle of France than the US did in the Battle of Bulge in 1944)
The Battle of France lasted from 10 May to 25 June 1940. That's a total of 46 days. If you break that down, here's what the Germans lost on average every day fighting in France...
Men (killed & wounded): 4,013.5 PER DAY
Aircraft: 26.87 PER DAY
Tanks: 17.29 PER DAY
Those numbers means that the daily average loss for the Germans in the French campaign was roughly half an infantry division lost every day, about 2 complete Staffel (squadrons) of fighters lost every day, and about 2/3 a complete panzer company lost EVERY SINLGE DAY.
So the notion that France just rolled over and didn't fight in the Spring of 1940, is patently false.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:21 am to Adam4LSU
quote:
This. The US was shite before WW1 in terms of military and economic power.
1) False
2) If you think American entry into WWI was the primary causation of American economic and military power in the 20th century, you are likewise mistaken.
The U.S. military wasn't a major power in the early 20th the century because U.S. foreign policy didn't require it. I would say one of the WORST results of WWI and WWII for the United States is it turned us into a global hegemonic power. Sure, that offers you some benefits economically but at a price.
America's latent military and economic potential were always present. Our economy would have flourished whether we entered European wars or not.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:34 am to fr33manator
Without WWII there would be no continuous Income Tax. Income Taxes were implemented when we joined WWI, and ceased when the war ended. The program was revived when we entered WWII and never ceased after the war ended due to the increased military industry. 
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:37 am to Darth_Vader
What I want to know is how you always have so many pertinent graphs and charts handy all the time. It's like you have a folder saved to your desktop labeled "Military history graphics for Tigerdroppings." 
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:40 am to ChewyDante
quote:
What I want to know is how you always have so many pertinent graphs and charts handy all the time. It's like you have a folder saved to your desktop labeled "Military history graphics for Tigerdroppings."
Well, it starts with me know what information I want to convey and then going to find links, pics, and/or graphs to cite that back up said information.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:48 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
What I want to know is how you always have so many pertinent graphs and charts handy all the time. It's like you have a folder saved to your desktop labeled "Military history graphics for Tigerdroppings."
Well, it starts with me know what information I want to convey and then going to find links, pics, and/or graphs to cite that back up said information.
so yes, eh?
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:52 am to CelticDog
quote:
so yes, eh?
Well, No, I don't have any such folder, unless you count what is stored in my head.
For example, in my post on German losses during the Battle of France, I knew already the Germans suffered pretty heavy casualties there. So I went and cited sources, including giving links, and used them to formulate my post. I did basically the same thing on my post before that. I knew the US even before WWI was both an economic and naval world power. All I had to do was go look up stats and figures to back up my point.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:53 am to soccerfüt
I refer you to the time in the not too distant past when Napoleonic France not only wiped the floor with Prussia and Austria twice, but, also had almost all of the western German provinces actually in French uniform fighting against Russia, Austria, Prussia and Great Britain.
Napoleonic France dominated the German-speaking peoples from 1805 to the end of 1813.
JIMMIES OFFICIALLY RUSTLED !!
Napoleonic France dominated the German-speaking peoples from 1805 to the end of 1813.
JIMMIES OFFICIALLY RUSTLED !!
Posted on 5/11/16 at 11:56 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
So the notion that France just rolled over and didn't fight in the Spring of 1940, is patently false.
Thanks for posting these figures !
Posted on 5/11/16 at 12:05 pm to Champagne
quote:
Thanks for posting these figures !
My pleasure.
One other thing of note about the Battle of France, just as the Germans lost more there than American forces lost in the Battle of the Bulge, Germany also suffered higher losses agaisnt the French in 1940 than they did against the Americans in the Battle of the Bulge.
In fact, the Battle of France ranks 5th on the list of bloodiest battles of WWII. It was the bloodiest battle of the war not fought on the Eastern Front.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 12:05 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Well, it starts with me know what information I want to convey and then going to find links, pics, and/or graphs to cite that back up said information.
Oh I get that. But it's a colossal pain in the arse Googling the info and then finding the stuff you are specifically looking for and then coming back here to image post it. It takes patience and effort. I commend your posting ethic.
I was a little disappointed you didn't create a thread commemorating the start of the 1940 offensive in the West yesterday. I thought about it and then decided it would be way too much work to actually make a good post out of it.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 12:06 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Men( Killed and wounded): 4,013.5 PER DAY Aircraft: 26.87 PER DAY Tanks: 17.29 PER DAY
Some perspective.
This post was edited on 5/11/16 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 5/11/16 at 12:08 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
I was a little disappointed you didn't create a thread commemorating the start of the 1940 offensive in the West yesterday. I thought about it and then decided it would be way too much work to actually make a good post out of it.
I thought about doing this. The idea first hit me about a week ago to start a thread on the 10th and update it daily through the fall of France on June 25. Course I got busy yesterday and totally forgot.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 12:11 pm to fr33manator
quote:
Some perspective.
And that's a total over a period of 12 years. During the Battle of France the Germans were suffering losses daily that just about mirror our total losses over the entire Iraq War.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 12:33 pm to Darth_Vader
Precisely. The British had almost 60'000 casualties (and 1/3 of those dead) in a matter of hours at the Somme.
It's mind blowing.
It's mind blowing.
Page 9 of 10
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News