I didn't say they had any reason to, I'm just saying that in hindsight had any nation enforced the treaty of versailles, the war would have been drastically different.acEofspadEs6313 wrote:
Why would they defend Poland when they signed an agreement for territory from Poland?jonsimon wrote:
Russia was the only power that had a chance of defeating the germans alone. Even then, though, it would have been a long and bloody victory. Really France could have ended the nazis when they retook the neutral zone long before war even broke out. Likewise the soviets could have defended poland and made the war that much easier.
They (Soviets) signed the pact to get a common border with Germany. They didn't want to defend.jonsimon wrote:
I didn't say they had any reason to, I'm just saying that in hindsight had any nation enforced the treaty of versailles, the war would have been drastically different.acEofspadEs6313 wrote:
Why would they defend Poland when they signed an agreement for territory from Poland?jonsimon wrote:
Russia was the only power that had a chance of defeating the germans alone. Even then, though, it would have been a long and bloody victory. Really France could have ended the nazis when they retook the neutral zone long before war even broke out. Likewise the soviets could have defended poland and made the war that much easier.
What I said was that Britain wouldn't have survived if Russia was lost, because Hitler could concentrate everything on them and them alone. If this was the case, Germany would have had much more resources than Britain, and wouldn't have failed.Vilham wrote:
.... I have never heard a Brit ever say we could of won the war by ourselves. I suggest you go and actually READ peoples posts.
What people have repeatedly stated is that RUSSIA won the war for us and that BRITAIN could have survived as a country even if Europe was taken, Hilter could not have invaded...
Ultimately the Russians would have defeated the Germans. You cant defeat a country that large with such a huge population. As to if Hitler had his whole army... Russia was already fighting around 80% of all German strength, if the other 20% had been entered into the battle most of that 20% would have run back to their Russian comrades, seeing as most of that 20% were Oest divisions.
About the other 20%, I don't see why any of them would have run back to Russia, when the Russia government was just as cruel towards its peoples the German one was, if not worse.
Russia won world war II.
How the U.S. could've ended World War II:
1 nuke for Tokyo, 1 nuke for Berlin.
1 nuke for Tokyo, 1 nuke for Berlin.
Even then Hitler knew he couldnt do it, the outcome would have been the UK allying with Germany, which Hitler wanted to do anyway.nukchebi0 wrote:
What I said was that Britain wouldn't have survived if Russia was lost, because Hitler could concentrate everything on them and them alone. If this was the case, Germany would have had much more resources than Britain, and wouldn't have failed.Vilham wrote:
.... I have never heard a Brit ever say we could of won the war by ourselves. I suggest you go and actually READ peoples posts.
What people have repeatedly stated is that RUSSIA won the war for us and that BRITAIN could have survived as a country even if Europe was taken, Hilter could not have invaded...
Ultimately the Russians would have defeated the Germans. You cant defeat a country that large with such a huge population. As to if Hitler had his whole army... Russia was already fighting around 80% of all German strength, if the other 20% had been entered into the battle most of that 20% would have run back to their Russian comrades, seeing as most of that 20% were Oest divisions.
About the other 20%, I don't see why any of them would have run back to Russia, when the Russia government was just as cruel towards its peoples the German one was, if not worse.
Yes Stalin was harsh on people who returned, normally killing them and yet hundreds of thousands still did return.
How about one sniper bullet for Hitler and one for Tojo?Fancy_Pollux wrote:
How the U.S. could've ended World War II:
1 nuke for Tokyo, 1 nuke for Berlin.
and one for Stalin..
You mean the soviet soldiers? well, they had nothing but a family in their homeland.Vilham wrote:
Yes Stalin was harsh on people who returned, normally killing them and yet hundreds of thousands still did return.
Last edited by BALTINS (2007-04-29 12:24:27)
Hitler wanted to have an alliance with Britain or at least peace because he wanted to concentrate on the Soviet Union unhindered. Once Germany destroyed them, which they would have without the British bothering they, there would have been nothing to prevent Hitler from then concentrating on Britain.Vilham wrote:
Even then Hitler knew he couldnt do it, the outcome would have been the UK allying with Germany, which Hitler wanted to do anyway.nukchebi0 wrote:
What I said was that Britain wouldn't have survived if Russia was lost, because Hitler could concentrate everything on them and them alone. If this was the case, Germany would have had much more resources than Britain, and wouldn't have failed.Vilham wrote:
.... I have never heard a Brit ever say we could of won the war by ourselves. I suggest you go and actually READ peoples posts.
What people have repeatedly stated is that RUSSIA won the war for us and that BRITAIN could have survived as a country even if Europe was taken, Hilter could not have invaded...
Ultimately the Russians would have defeated the Germans. You cant defeat a country that large with such a huge population. As to if Hitler had his whole army... Russia was already fighting around 80% of all German strength, if the other 20% had been entered into the battle most of that 20% would have run back to their Russian comrades, seeing as most of that 20% were Oest divisions.
About the other 20%, I don't see why any of them would have run back to Russia, when the Russia government was just as cruel towards its peoples the German one was, if not worse.
Yes Stalin was harsh on people who returned, normally killing them and yet hundreds of thousands still did return.
may I quote " poor analogy Poe " in his own words
forgets lend lease act.CameronPoe wrote:
The US were particularly reluctant to help the Brits out. Sure they were all in with fantastic support after Pearl Harbour but if the Japs had kept themselves to themselves I'd probably be posting this in the German Protectorate of Irland right now.
Goofy. The Allies won WWII. End of story.Braddock wrote:
Russia won world war II.
The French were poorly led and had the worst equipment , they couldn't stop a boyscout troop
The Char was a mean tank. No German tank could take it out. Also, the Dewotine 520 was a great airplane that the French had.logitech487 wrote:
The French were poorly led and had the worst equipment , they couldn't stop a boyscout troop
In D&ST?krazed wrote:
ive seen it a bunch of times too, its just not all that commonBubbalo wrote:
What's funny is I've never seen Brits and Americans hijack threads in this manner. Ever.
Nobody can say that the French had the worst gear. It was just placed and commanded poorly.acEofspadEs6313 wrote:
The Char was a mean tank. No German tank could take it out. Also, the Dewotine 520 was a great airplane that the French had.logitech487 wrote:
The French were poorly led and had the worst equipment , they couldn't stop a boyscout troop
Also placed too much value in the Maginot Line.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Nobody can say that the French had the worst gear. It was just placed and commanded poorly.acEofspadEs6313 wrote:
The Char was a mean tank. No German tank could take it out. Also, the Dewotine 520 was a great airplane that the French had.logitech487 wrote:
The French were poorly led and had the worst equipment , they couldn't stop a boyscout troop
Stalin signed a non-aggresion pact with the Nazis, so thats why he didnt bother to attack Hitler when he got Poland. When the Nazis went into Soviet territory, Hitler betrayed the pact and Stalin declared war on the Nazis. At first Stalin didnt believe the advisor guy, because fighting a war on 2 fronts is the worst military tactic you can do.
noice 
more often in other sections but its happened a few times here, usualy the people that do it end up leaving or being bannedBubbalo wrote:
In D&ST?krazed wrote:
ive seen it a bunch of times too, its just not all that commonBubbalo wrote:
What's funny is I've never seen Brits and Americans hijack threads in this manner. Ever.