what for?they wasnt ours. now falklands on the other hand
Don't start that one.
few questions about ww2
- Thread starter jamesmorris86
- Start date
Don't start that one.
Whilst the RAF and Navy were massively important if it was not for Russia and Germany foolishly reneging on their non-agression pact with Russia then Britian would have been sunk despite all our best efforts.
Germany was foolish enough to turn on Russia when they had effectively agreed for Russia to sit out the war on the sidelines but in an understandable case of itchy palsm on both sides nither trusted the other and war shortly followed. But when you have crazy commies and a loony nut job what do you expect?
IF Germany had been free to focus on Britain I would not be sitting here now and neither would the rest of you.
Germany was foolish enough to turn on Russia when they had effectively agreed for Russia to sit out the war on the sidelines but in an understandable case of itchy palsm on both sides nither trusted the other and war shortly followed. But when you have crazy commies and a loony nut job what do you expect?
IF Germany had been free to focus on Britain I would not be sitting here now and neither would the rest of you.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 3,499
- Location
- London, UK
who knows what would happen if they dominated our skies. they could possibly bomb all our major southern ports, hampering our fleet and possibly bombing them too. i still believe the battle of britain was won in the air.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 3,499
- Location
- London, UK
i have to agree with you. but i do like to think we wouldnt go down without a jolly good fight old boy, ala churchill speech
i have to agree with you. but i do like to think we wouldnt go down without a jolly good fight old boy, ala churchill speech
Hell I had would have crawled out of the womb 40 years before I was consummated to kill some ******* Germans to keep this country free.
Looking at the war whilst, circumstances permitting, they may have been able to invade Britain they would have lost war for the years if not decades they would have had to put up with trying to actually control a country a country which would have defied them at every single turn! (unlike the French the cheese eating surrender monkeys!)
Just glad Hitler was brain dead as well a ****ing loony! Rule Britannia forever more!
The debt that britain owed america from ww2 was immense, but if it hadnt been for americas industrial might ww2 would have been very different, america was able to put machinery and men into the war on a scale that no european country could match, i remember reading stephen ambrose's book citizen soldiers, were a german soldier taking part in the battle of the bulge remarked about the ability of the americans to supply their units in the field, he said that they captured an area were artillery shells were lined up on the road for 3km on both sides, and in his oral testimony, he said that his father fought in ww1, things were good till the americans came in, same in ww2, the minute america became involved in the war they could bring unprecidented firepower.
I'm not sure about Germany's atomic energy program. Certainly they had some of the most brilliant quantum physicists of the time, but there was no evidence of a concerted effort to build an "atomic bomb". The program appeared to be more directed towards wider applications for atomic energy. Anyway it's a point of contention for many historians; who would have got the A-bomb first had the Nazis defeated Russia.
You might want to look up about Werner Heisenberg though. One of the finest minds of his generation, he was (early on) in charge of the German investigations into atomic energy. He (supposedly) persuaded Hitler that an atomic bomb was not viable, and that he should focus efforts elsewhere. After the Nazis fell, Heisenberg surrendered to the allies, and was held in England along with several other prominant scientists who has surrendered. Once the dropping of the A-bomb on Hiroshima was announced to them, they were generally stunned, but Heisenberg wrote on the blackboard a sequence of equations which govern many of the processes involved. Either he really was just so brilliant that he could replicate the product of years of intensive research in minutes, or he already knew far more about the development of atomic weaponry than he had let on to his masters.
Anyway, we can never tell the outcome of a "what if" scenario, but two superpowers (USA and nazi europe) each with a fledgeling nuclear arsenal, and determined to wipe each other out... well it could only end very badly. Just who would be left to rule the resulting wasteland is anyones guess.
Pretty much this if Germany never went after Russia, or imagine a scenario where Russia allied with the Nazis (or simply didn't exist), then Germany would have focussed on Britain.
Wouldn't be an easy fight But they would have made it.
Heisenberg told Hitler that his calculations showed that critical mass of Uranium was about 900kg. That would mean that any bomb using it would be several tons in weight, way beyond any aircraft they had or were likely to have. So the project was abandoned.
Trouble is, the real figure is about 9kg, and the mystery remains as to why Heisenberg made such a simple mistake. He gave more than one version of the reasons, and to this day we simply don't know as to whether he genuinely thought this, or whether he didn't want Hitler to have the bomb and so told him it was impossible. He could do this safely as the Nazis had driven out the few other people who could do the maths for critical mass. There as people who take one side or the other, but there's no clear evidence one way or the other. It's worth seeing Michael Frayn's play "Copenhagen" for one possible version of what happened.
M
It was a combination of things, Germany attacking Russia, the Royal Navy being powerful enough to tear apart any invasion fleet, and the RAF maintaining air superiority.
Those that are just saying it was the RAF or Royal Navy are doing a great injustice to servicemen in the other arms of HM forces.
Those that are just saying it was the RAF or Royal Navy are doing a great injustice to servicemen in the other arms of HM forces.
the way i see it...
The Germans were winning the air battle, but made a big mistake by turning their attention to the cities. This in turn gave the RAF the time to regroup and get back to full strength. They then fought back much more effectively than before, with more and more spitfires being used, and the help of radar they were able to hold their own. This then caused delays for Hitlers plans to invade the UK.
Also, had the Germans went ahead with the invasion on the UK, they would not have got very far. The royal navy would have massively reduced the amount of supplies and fresh men etc getting to the front like on the England, simply by sinking all the ships that tried to cross the channel. This would then weaken the Germans. The British however would have fresh tanks, fresh men, fresh supplies, and much higher moral. This combined with massive defenses that were in place before the invasion begun, would have stopped the Germans in their tracks. Had the invasion took place, it probably would have ended the war much sooner...as they'd have nowhere to go once defeated. Much like Dunkirk, but with less chance of escape.
The Germans were winning the air battle, but made a big mistake by turning their attention to the cities. This in turn gave the RAF the time to regroup and get back to full strength. They then fought back much more effectively than before, with more and more spitfires being used, and the help of radar they were able to hold their own. This then caused delays for Hitlers plans to invade the UK.
Also, had the Germans went ahead with the invasion on the UK, they would not have got very far. The royal navy would have massively reduced the amount of supplies and fresh men etc getting to the front like on the England, simply by sinking all the ships that tried to cross the channel. This would then weaken the Germans. The British however would have fresh tanks, fresh men, fresh supplies, and much higher moral. This combined with massive defenses that were in place before the invasion begun, would have stopped the Germans in their tracks. Had the invasion took place, it probably would have ended the war much sooner...as they'd have nowhere to go once defeated. Much like Dunkirk, but with less chance of escape.
Last edited:
I suggest that you try to replace some of your jingoistic raving with knowledge.
France had no chance of defeating Germany all by itself. Surrender was the least bad option available, as the other was effectively ordering the military to commit pointless suicide.
There was French resistance from outside France (Free French Forces), centred (unsurprisingly) in Britain.
There was also resistance within France. Allo Allo is not a historical documentary. Maquis is not a word made up for Star Trek.
As soon as there was any real chance, French resistance mushroomed both inside and outside France. Britain (and later also the USA) supported the French resistance because it was militarily useful. The Free French military numbered about 300,000 by the time of the Allied invasion of France, hardy a negligable amount. The French resistance forces within occupied France supplied information to the Allies, sabotaged the German military and started a revolt in Paris.
British nationalist burbling against the French is a similar sort of thing as American nationalist burbling about how the USA won both world wars by itself, a noble knight riding their white charger to rescue the world out of heroic altruism.
I think most people think that Hitler was bad because of things such as industrial scale slaughter of civilians, the experiments on people, a war of aggression against everyone and the whole deranged, ranting dictator thing. You know, minor stuff like that.
People generally do what they thought was best. Torquemada did what he thought was best. People in Al-Qaeda are doing what they think is best. Pol Pot did what he thought was best. "doing what he [/she/they] thought was best" doesn't affect how good or bad the things being done are.
Also could used petrol to set the sea on fire if those pesky germans had tried to invade.
We had plenty of fuel to go around to mess crazy ideas.
The french had become complacent, they thought nobody would ever invade them after WW1, they had a dated army with generals that were in the 70s and 80s, the germans just walked in France, plus the fact they built a huge line of guns and defence barriers on the border but left 100s miles free and guess where the germans went.
We had plenty of fuel to go around to mess crazy ideas.
The french had become complacent, they thought nobody would ever invade them after WW1, they had a dated army with generals that were in the 70s and 80s, the germans just walked in France, plus the fact they built a huge line of guns and defence barriers on the border but left 100s miles free and guess where the germans went.
didnt poland or part of it belong to germany in the first place and the people of germany were totaly screwed over by the Treaty of Versailles ,mass unemployment then Hitler brought the country back thereby gaining the support he needed. I cant imagine what its like having a government that endorses killing a whole section of the community i.e jews makes you wonder how you would react i.e do you put your own life on the line to hide/protect them or bury your head in the sand id like to think the former but under that stress i may have been a coward
Agreed with both, in fact when the French forces did fight before France fell they faught very bravely and skillfully. It was the complacencny of the General staff that lost the fight for France, they were that old and behind the times, some of them didn't allow telephones in their headquaters.
Also the Magino(sp) line wasn't completed so the Germans just drove straight round it.
The French politicians bodged the military side of things, but that's nothing new nor particularly French.
The Maginot line covered the entire French-German border if I recall correctly. It was a very good defensive line, really impressive. It was the guts of the French defence against a possible attack from Germany and of the deterrence of that attack. People came from all over to see it. Attacking it would have been a nightmare.
But someone should have said "hey, check this out. Germany borders Belgium. Belgium borders France. So defending the French-German border isn't enough unless Belgium can stop a German invasion. Which it can't possibly do."
It was completed. It was never intended to protect the French-Belgium border.
I stand corrected, knew there was some reason Gerry just drove round it.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 1,505
How did stock trading, markets work in occupied in France?
Borich
Borich