BF2S Forums WW2 history, a few questions for a lighter conversation

Vilham wrote:

yeah there are a few but what realy anoyes me is when Americans make films and steal things that other countries did, like stealing the enigma machine, it was done by 2 norweigans or sweeds or something from a sinking sub, ie they went into a sinking ship to retreive it and risked being drowned, a very brave thing to do, then some American makes a film in which they claim to get the enigma and thereby mislead people who dont know much on the subject.

It happens all the time. Hollywood are always giving the US more credit than they're due for operations in Europe, where the only REALLY important thing the US did in Europe was to facilitate the D-day landings. There needed to be troops over there and without the US there is no way they would have got there. But after that US involvement was quite limited.

In the Pacific though, the US did great - against the Japanese, and you don't want to fight the Japanese, they're mental. After victory in Europe, without the US, I reckon the Europeans would have worked out some sort of deal with the Japanese giving them loads of land. Bombing Pearl harbour was almost as stupid as Hitler attacking Russia.

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Vilham wrote:

yeah there are a few but what realy anoyes me is when Americans make films and steal things that other countries did, like stealing the enigma machine, it was done by 2 norweigans or sweeds or something from a sinking sub, ie they went into a sinking ship to retreive it and risked being drowned, a very brave thing to do, then some American makes a film in which they claim to get the enigma and thereby mislead people who dont know much on the subject.

It happens all the time. Hollywood are always giving the US more credit than they're due for operations in Europe, where the only REALLY important thing the US did in Europe was to facilitate the D-day landings. There needed to be troops over there and without the US there is no way they would have got there. But after that US involvement was quite limited.

In the Pacific though, the US did great - against the Japanese, and you don't want to fight the Japanese, they're mental. After victory in Europe, without the US, I reckon the Europeans would have worked out some sort of deal with the Japanese giving them loads of land. Bombing Pearl harbour was almost as stupid as Hitler attacking Russia.

Ummmmm, the US involvement was limited???


Maybe someone can explain how Germany conquored ALL of Europe less England, prior to the US entrance in WW2. You act like all the hard work was over and that the US just stepped in to take the glory. Maybe you should look at the "before the US entered the war"" and "after the US entered the war" maps of Europe.

Europe was already beaten and the Soviets were at peace with Germany before Hitlers betrayal.

The role of the US was crucial. As I did mention. Just not as big as made out by Hollywood.  It was attacking Russia that fucked Hitler over. He shouldn't have, then he probably would have won. As I said earlier, what the US did that was critical was to make it possible to land in Europe. This opened up a second front so the Nazis were caught between the US/European/Canadian forces and the Soviet forces. The Russians were the most important, not the US. The role the Russians played is often overlooked, because soon after they were 'the enemy'.

Invading Europe was not that impressive for Hitler. The British essentially let him have Czechoslovakia, then he invaded Poland with Russia (that must've been hard). Italy were the original facists so they were instant allies and Franco was a nationalist so he sort of allied with Hitler, but refused to let Hitler attack the British from his territitory (because he was scared of us). Stalin didn't like Hitler, but was quite happy with his non-aggression pact. The only major country Hitler had to invade was France, all the other countries he invaded were incapable of putting up any sort of fight (apart from resistance movements against occupying forces).

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ummmmm, the US involvement was limited???


Maybe someone can explain how Germany conquored ALL of Europe less England, prior to the US entrance in WW2. You act like all the hard work was over and that the US just stepped in to take the glory. Maybe you should look at the "before the US entered the war"" and "after the US entered the war" maps of Europe.

Europe was already beaten and the Soviets were at peace with Germany before Hitlers betrayal.

The role of the US was crucial. As I did mention. Just not as big as made out by Hollywood.  It was attacking Russia that fucked Hitler over. He shouldn't have, then he probably would have won. As I said earlier, what the US did that was critical was to make it possible to land in Europe. This opened up a second front so the Nazis were caught between the US/European/Canadian forces and the Soviet forces. The Russians were the most important, not the US. The role the Russians played is often overlooked, because soon after they were 'the enemy'.

Invading Europe was not that impressive for Hitler. The British essentially let him have Czechoslovakia, then he invaded Poland with Russia (that must've been hard). Italy were the original facists so they were instant allies and Franco was a nationalist so he sort of allied with Hitler, but refused to let Hitler attack the British from his territitory (because he was scared of us). Stalin didn't like Hitler, but was quite happy with his non-aggression pact. The only major country Hitler had to invade was France, all the other countries he invaded were incapable of putting up any sort of fight (apart from resistance movements against occupying forces).

Are you forgetting the US and British kicked Germany out of Africa and Sicilly prior to entering Euorpe??.....The Soviets fought 1 enemy, on 1 front in 1 theater. The rest of the allies fought Germany, Italy and Japan all over the world, on mulitiple fronts.  Not to mention, it was the Russian winters and not the Russians that defeated Germany on the Eastern front. Hitler had the Soviets on their knees.

He is right, the Russian winter total fucked over the Germans, Hitler refused to allow cold weather gear and there equipment and supplies ran out. Pacific theater was almost totaly the US in the last 3 years(except in China where the British and a few others kicked some ass). Anyways the European Allies would have had hardly anything to fight with without our supplies.

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

The role of the US was crucial. As I did mention. Just not as big as made out by Hollywood.  It was attacking Russia that fucked Hitler over. He shouldn't have, then he probably would have won. As I said earlier, what the US did that was critical was to make it possible to land in Europe. This opened up a second front so the Nazis were caught between the US/European/Canadian forces and the Soviet forces. The Russians were the most important, not the US. The role the Russians played is often overlooked, because soon after they were 'the enemy'.

Invading Europe was not that impressive for Hitler. The British essentially let him have Czechoslovakia, then he invaded Poland with Russia (that must've been hard). Italy were the original facists so they were instant allies and Franco was a nationalist so he sort of allied with Hitler, but refused to let Hitler attack the British from his territitory (because he was scared of us). Stalin didn't like Hitler, but was quite happy with his non-aggression pact. The only major country Hitler had to invade was France, all the other countries he invaded were incapable of putting up any sort of fight (apart from resistance movements against occupying forces).

Are you forgetting the US and British kicked Germany out of Africa and Sicilly prior to entering Euorpe??.....The Soviets fought 1 enemy, on 1 front in 1 theater. The rest of the allies fought Germany, Italy and Japan all over the world, on mulitiple fronts.  Not to mention, it was the Russian winters and not the Russians that defeated Germany on the Eastern front. Hitler had the Soviets on their knees.

If I remember rightly things were going well in Africa before the US got involved. Monty pushed Rommel back a long way and took Tripoli, despite being outnumbered by almost 20:1. The US were only involved in Tunisia and Algeria weren't they? The bulk of the fighting in Africa, big battles like El-Alamein, was over by the time the US were involved.

It was more than just the Russian winters that beat the Germans. I think the 10 million Russian casualties had something to do with it too. They had a lot of troops to throw at the Germans. Not to mention the best tank of WWII, the T-34.

The supplies (on loan) were very helpfull. The US lent us $50 billion, Canada lent us about $5 billion. Handy.

Yes, the British were the doing well in Africa. Yes, the Soviets had a lot of casualties. Germany pushed the Soviets all the back to Moscow by the time they got caught up in the Russian winter. THAT was the only thing that stopped him. Please don't get me wrong, I am not intending to take anything away from the Soviet Union in the defense of their country, but, they were on the defensive until that winter wipped out the German army.

This is not in response to anyone in particular. What I find interesting is that many people, for no good reason, and not just on here, feel that it is their moral duty to comment on how US action during the war is overrated and that it doesn't deserve the credit it generally gets.

It's historical revisionism of sorts. It doesn't matter how much you like or dislike the US and what it's doing right now, but you can't change the fact that American interdiction in Europe was what tipped the balance in favor of the allies.

Just about everyone who fought in that war--fought well, or it wouldn't have lasted as long as it did. Every participating country that actually took action deserves credit, on both sides. American troops were not necessarily infinitely better fighters than the Wehrmacht. They were just what it took to break the axis occupation of western Europe that became the status quo.

And for some reason, people don't want to accept that.

CaptainMike wrote:

Pizdets that isn't entirely true. The US may have helped to tip the balance, but Russia did most of the work. Without Russia the war could have ended completely different.

How is that, the other allies had Germany literally, surrounded from one end of the world to the other, Germany lost air superiority COMPLETELY, that mean no chance to rebuild, or produce arms. Germany lost the war the SECOND they lost air superiority. The only question that was left was, how long it might have taken.

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Are you forgetting the US and British kicked Germany out of Africa and Sicilly prior to entering Euorpe??.....The Soviets fought 1 enemy, on 1 front in 1 theater. The rest of the allies fought Germany, Italy and Japan all over the world, on mulitiple fronts.  Not to mention, it was the Russian winters and not the Russians that defeated Germany on the Eastern front. Hitler had the Soviets on their knees.

If I remember rightly things were going well in Africa before the US got involved. Monty pushed Rommel back a long way and took Tripoli, despite being outnumbered by almost 20:1. The US were only involved in Tunisia and Algeria weren't they? The bulk of the fighting in Africa, big battles like El-Alamein, was over by the time the US were involved.

It was more than just the Russian winters that beat the Germans. I think the 10 million Russian casualties had something to do with it too. They had a lot of troops to throw at the Germans. Not to mention the best tank of WWII, the T-34.

The supplies (on loan) were very helpfull. The US lent us $50 billion, Canada lent us about $5 billion. Handy.

Yes, the British were the doing well in Africa. Yes, the Soviets had a lot of casualties. Germany pushed the Soviets all the back to Moscow by the time they got caught up in the Russian winter. THAT was the only thing that stopped him. Please don't get me wrong, I am not intending to take anything away from the Soviet Union in the defense of their country, but, they were on the defensive until that winter wipped out the German army.

The Russian winter stopped the German advance. The Germans were relying on a quick suprise victory. The Russians made a lot of stupid mistakes early on. Once they got their act together the Germans were in real trouble. The winter bought them the time they needed to organise and they then pushed the Germans back. You have to remember that the Russians vastly outnumbered the Germans and had better armour, the Germans were better soldiers and had much better planes, but beating the Russians is hard, there's a lot of 'em - it's BIG too. The aim of Operation Barbarossa was only ever to invade Moscow, I doubt that the rest of Russia would have fallen if Moscow was taken and the Germans would still have had a massive battle on their hands.

With another 3.5 million German troops available D-Day would have been futile. A two front attack absolutely fucked the Germans up.

The Pacific, the US did all the work. Europe, Russia took the brunt of German aggression. Britain held out valiantly, but we were never going to invade Europe on our own.

Russia was Hitlers greatest mistake.

US troops were not that essential. Apart from the D-day landings, which could not have happened without American involvement. Without the second front Hitler might have beaten the Russians, with another front (even if it hadn't been a huge offensive) the Germans were in serious trouble.

I'm not saying the US did nothing. They did a lot. But Russia did the most.

I was just pointing out that Hollywood portrayals of WWII that tend to show the US as winning the war single handedly, are not true. Historical facts are often changed to favour the US in films, because that's the way Hollywood often is. We've had an example, about Enigma, posted already. You do seem to know your WWII history quite well and so I hope you know that a lot of the claims made in films are just fabrications. The Great Escape is a good example, based on a true story of British escapees, in Hollywood they decided the audience wanted an American protaganist, so we got Steve McQueen as the main character - despite the fact no Americans were involved.

You really can't deny that Hollywood have overplayed the role of the US in the European theatre in WWII. Conversely Russia's role has been downplayed in films, because they were always 'the bad guy', so it's not what audiences wanted.

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Yes, the British were the doing well in Africa. Yes, the Soviets had a lot of casualties. Germany pushed the Soviets all the back to Moscow by the time they got caught up in the Russian winter. THAT was the only thing that stopped him. Please don't get me wrong, I am not intending to take anything away from the Soviet Union in the defense of their country, but, they were on the defensive until that winter wipped out the German army.

The Russian winter stopped the German advance. The Germans were relying on a quick suprise victory. The Russians made a lot of stupid mistakes early on. Once they got their act together the Germans were in real trouble. The winter bought them the time they needed to organise and they then pushed the Germans back. You have to remember that the Russians vastly outnumbered the Germans and had better armour, the Germans were better soldiers and had much better planes, but beating the Russians is hard, there's a lot of 'em - it's BIG too. The aim of Operation Barbarossa was only ever to invade Moscow, I doubt that the rest of Russia would have fallen if Moscow was taken and the Germans would still have had a massive battle on their hands.

With another 3.5 million German troops available D-Day would have been futile. A two front attack absolutely fucked the Germans up.

The Pacific, the US did all the work. Europe, Russia took the brunt of German aggression. Britain held out valiantly, but we were never going to invade Europe on our own.

Russia was Hitlers greatest mistake.

US troops were not that essential. Apart from the D-day landings, which could not have happened without American involvement. Without the second front Hitler might have beaten the Russians, with another front (even if it hadn't been a huge offensive) the Germans were in serious trouble.

I'm not saying the US did nothing. They did a lot. But Russia did the most.

I was just pointing out that Hollywood portrayals of WWII that tend to show the US as winning the war single handedly, are not true. Historical facts are often changed to favour the US in films, because that's the way Hollywood often is. We've had an example, about Enigma, posted already. You do seem to know your WWII history quite well and so I hope you know that a lot of the claims made in films are just fabrications. The Great Escape is a good example, based on a true story of British escapees, in Hollywood they decided the audience wanted an American protaganist, so we got Steve McQueen as the main character - despite the fact no Americans were involved.

You really can't deny that Hollywood have overplayed the role of the US in the European theatre in WWII. Conversely Russia's role has been downplayed in films, because they were always 'the bad guy', so it's not what audiences wanted.

good point on the hollywood issue, so I will bow to that point.

But really, bottom line is, air superiority was everything in WW2, the ones who enjoyed it would win the war, and until the US intervined Germany had it. The Soviets, did not have nor could ever get it. As long as Germany had an industry to provide planes that could keep the Soviet cities in ruins, there is no way in hell that Germany was going to lose that war to the Soviets.

Now, I am not saying this because I am an American, I am saying this because it is a fact. Air superiority was the key to victory in WW2 and the British and Americans, not the Soviets, took air superiority over Europe. That is it.


Every other victory that took place in WW2 was possible only because the allies had command of the air.

There was no one key to the war. Splitting the german front certainly aided the soviet army, but it is irresponsible to believe that one factor alone controlled the tide of the war and the fall of germany.

CaptainMike wrote:

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:

I cant decide, so ima put two:

1. What nation of the allies or axis would you fight for and why?
Australia, Germany (not Hitler, GERMANY)

2. In what theater of operation would you rather be involved and why?
Indonesian, European

3. In what branch of service and why?
Ground Forces (AIF), Paratrooper (Fallschirmjager)

4. In what capacity would you rather do your fighting?
Slogging it out on the Kokoda Track/Trail, Paradropping where ever im needed.

The Fallschirmjager in the late war took walked or rode a truck to get to where they needed, they didn't take the plane. By mid-1944 they were just infantry, and some replacements weren't actually qualified to be a paratrooper. Their glory days would have been teh early days in Crete and Poland.

True, but that didnt stop them being one of the most elite groups of the war.
What about Monte Cassino? sure it was a loss, but they were ordered to pull out. they could have held out for much longer than they did.

Plus they had the FG-42 .

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ummmmm, the US involvement was limited???


Maybe someone can explain how Germany conquored ALL of Europe less England, prior to the US entrance in WW2. You act like all the hard work was over and that the US just stepped in to take the glory. Maybe you should look at the "before the US entered the war"" and "after the US entered the war" maps of Europe.

Europe was already beaten and the Soviets were at peace with Germany before Hitlers betrayal.

The role of the US was crucial. As I did mention. Just not as big as made out by Hollywood.  It was attacking Russia that fucked Hitler over. He shouldn't have, then he probably would have won. As I said earlier, what the US did that was critical was to make it possible to land in Europe. This opened up a second front so the Nazis were caught between the US/European/Canadian forces and the Soviet forces. The Russians were the most important, not the US. The role the Russians played is often overlooked, because soon after they were 'the enemy'.

Invading Europe was not that impressive for Hitler. The British essentially let him have Czechoslovakia, then he invaded Poland with Russia (that must've been hard). Italy were the original facists so they were instant allies and Franco was a nationalist so he sort of allied with Hitler, but refused to let Hitler attack the British from his territitory (because he was scared of us). Stalin didn't like Hitler, but was quite happy with his non-aggression pact. The only major country Hitler had to invade was France, all the other countries he invaded were incapable of putting up any sort of fight (apart from resistance movements against occupying forces).

Are you forgetting the US and British kicked Germany out of Africa and Sicilly prior to entering Euorpe??.....The Soviets fought 1 enemy, on 1 front in 1 theater. The rest of the allies fought Germany, Italy and Japan all over the world, on mulitiple fronts.  Not to mention, it was the Russian winters and not the Russians that defeated Germany on the Eastern front. Hitler had the Soviets on their knees.

the russians were fighting something like 50 divisions and everyone else combined were fighting about 10, the russians saved europe! Also by the time d-day happened the russians had already beaten the Germans and they were fleeing back to the borders of Germany, Italy was also out of the war by D-day infact on the 5th of June, essentially the Germans were fucked by D-day anyway.

Last edited by Vilham (2006-10-23 04:11:42)

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Yes, the British were the doing well in Africa. Yes, the Soviets had a lot of casualties. Germany pushed the Soviets all the back to Moscow by the time they got caught up in the Russian winter. THAT was the only thing that stopped him. Please don't get me wrong, I am not intending to take anything away from the Soviet Union in the defense of their country, but, they were on the defensive until that winter wipped out the German army.

The Russian winter stopped the German advance. The Germans were relying on a quick suprise victory. The Russians made a lot of stupid mistakes early on. Once they got their act together the Germans were in real trouble. The winter bought them the time they needed to organise and they then pushed the Germans back. You have to remember that the Russians vastly outnumbered the Germans and had better armour, the Germans were better soldiers and had much better planes, but beating the Russians is hard, there's a lot of 'em - it's BIG too. The aim of Operation Barbarossa was only ever to invade Moscow, I doubt that the rest of Russia would have fallen if Moscow was taken and the Germans would still have had a massive battle on their hands.

With another 3.5 million German troops available D-Day would have been futile. A two front attack absolutely fucked the Germans up.

The Pacific, the US did all the work. Europe, Russia took the brunt of German aggression. Britain held out valiantly, but we were never going to invade Europe on our own.

Russia was Hitlers greatest mistake.

US troops were not that essential. Apart from the D-day landings, which could not have happened without American involvement. Without the second front Hitler might have beaten the Russians, with another front (even if it hadn't been a huge offensive) the Germans were in serious trouble.

I'm not saying the US did nothing. They did a lot. But Russia did the most.

I was just pointing out that Hollywood portrayals of WWII that tend to show the US as winning the war single handedly, are not true. Historical facts are often changed to favour the US in films, because that's the way Hollywood often is. We've had an example, about Enigma, posted already. You do seem to know your WWII history quite well and so I hope you know that a lot of the claims made in films are just fabrications. The Great Escape is a good example, based on a true story of British escapees, in Hollywood they decided the audience wanted an American protaganist, so we got Steve McQueen as the main character - despite the fact no Americans were involved.

You really can't deny that Hollywood have overplayed the role of the US in the European theatre in WWII. Conversely Russia's role has been downplayed in films, because they were always 'the bad guy', so it's not what audiences wanted.

good point on the hollywood issue, so I will bow to that point.

But really, bottom line is, air superiority was everything in WW2, the ones who enjoyed it would win the war, and until the US intervined Germany had it. The Soviets, did not have nor could ever get it. As long as Germany had an industry to provide planes that could keep the Soviet cities in ruins, there is no way in hell that Germany was going to lose that war to the Soviets.

Now, I am not saying this because I am an American, I am saying this because it is a fact. Air superiority was the key to victory in WW2 and the British and Americans, not the Soviets, took air superiority over Europe. That is it.


Every other victory that took place in WW2 was possible only because the allies had command of the air.

Up to a year before d-day England had air superiority, ie absolutely nothing to do with America apart from the minority of pilots that were from America. Russians by D-day also had air superiority because the German planes werent made for the cold conditions and froze up meaning any Russian attack couldnt be countered from the air in time, if you want to know a hell of alot about the russian front read the book "Stalingrad" by Antony Beevor. Counter to popular belief by the time D-day happened the Germans were getting beaten... Their soldier KDR was higher but the russians still had millions more men than they did.

Last edited by Vilham (2006-10-23 04:19:13)

1. Australia (good descent moral folks unlike axis govts)

2. Australia (safe from bombs & stuff)

3. Transport (not much chance to kill or be killed)

4. Truck Driver - transport materiel between Alice Springs & Darwin. only risk to life & limb was other trucks.

Vilham wrote:

If hilter hadnt been so stupid the german air power would have won it for them, in i think 1945 Goering showed hitler designs for the first ever Jet powered fighter plane and hitler told him that he just wanted more technology in the V rockets, he was ignored and 50 of these planes were made and by the end of the war only 100 were shot down for something like 150 kills, Hitler found out that he was ignored but when shown the results of the planes he increased production. was just too late in increasing production because at this point in 1946 the Allies were already only something like 500 miles from Berlin. I cant remember the name of the plane, i had a quick check through my books but i cant remember which one its in, if i find it ill give a link to a wiki on it or something.

The shot down majority bombers and a minority of fighters, however their speeds were something like 2x faster than the planes we could put up against them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262

In the book i read they were made out to be much better than this wiki says, i don't really know which is correct, but I'm leaning more towards a published book than some information on the internet that can be posted by anyone...

Subtract a couple years from your time frame and you will be closer.  (The war ended in 1945.)

The Me262 was far better than the Allies' best fighters (P-51 and Spitfire).  It was about 100mph faster than the P-51 (541mph vs. 437mph).  The Allied aircraft could only reliably take out Me262s on take-off and landings,  but due to the limited range of the Me262-this happened frequently.  Germany did not have enough Me262s to make a difference.  They simply came too late in the war. 

When we talk about air superiority, we should consider air superiority to mean control of the air over Allied and Axis territory.  This did not happen for the allies until 1943, when long-range escort fighters were introduced.

Take note of Goering's quote when he first saw American P-51s over Berlin.  "...I knew the jig was up."