I'd agree with Stryyker. Yes, the Luftwaffe ultimately failed, but not due to Britain alone. While the British won the battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe was hardly decimated at that point. Even before official US involvement we not only contributed due to the lend/lease act but manpower as well. I understand national pride and everything, but the facts do speak otherwise on this matter. Somehow I doubt this is a subject that will ever be agreed upon in this forum. Then again, that's usually the point of debate.stryyker wrote:
i mean, if they had completely wiped them all out.aardfrith wrote:
What do you mean "If Germany could have pushed the French and English to the Channel"? They did - there was the mass withdrawal at Dunkerque. It wasn't all over for England, as proved in the Battle of Britain. We prevailed, the Luftwaffe failed, all without US involvement.stryyker wrote:
Russia was getting buttfucked until Stalingrad/Winter. If Germany could have pushed the French and English to the Channel, it would have been over for England, then Hitler could have focused most of his manpower for an assault on Russia and drove the Russians back to the Urals, which was Hitlers plan from the get go.
without the help of the US though, England alone could NOT have invaded France and retaken Fortress Europe
Poll
If the US hadn't entered WWII
| Europe would be speaking German | 33% | 33% - 67 | ||||
| Europe would be speaking Russian | 15% | 15% - 31 | ||||
| USSR would have liberated Europe | 16% | 16% - 33 | ||||
| World would be speaking German (eventually) | 15% | 15% - 31 | ||||
| World would be speaking Russian (eventually) | 3% | 3% - 6 | ||||
| Germany would share world with Japan | 8% | 8% - 17 | ||||
| Russia would share world with Japan | 1% | 1% - 3 | ||||
| World would be speaking Japanese | 5% | 5% - 10 | ||||
| Total: 198 | ||||||
One of teh reasons it's a good thing I'm an impartial observer.
I stand by my point. No country should be given special mention for WWII.
I stand by my point. No country should be given special mention for WWII.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
except Russia - they endured staggering losses, more than any other faction combinedSpark wrote:
One of teh reasons it's a good thing I'm an impartial observer.
I stand by my point. No country should be given special mention for WWII.
If the US had not been involved, England would have fallen by 1942. They simply did not have the manpower or resources to with stand a full on invasion from a technilogically superior force. Don't get me wrong, they would have fought hard, but, ultimately, they would have lost. Then, with the western and southern fronts closed, the full military might of Germany would have landed on Russia in one massive sweep, but in this occasion, as opposed to during Operation Barbarosa, the Germans would have all the oil and industrial production they needed, out numbered the Russians, and fielded better equipment. With the advantage of both quantity and quality, and without the HUGE amounts of vehicles and tanks shipped to Russia by Britian and the US, they would have fell in less than a year. Now, the Third Reich would stretch from ocean to ocean, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and as far south as south Africa. In other words, everything not Noth America would be German or Japenese owned. The two would sit back, develop their navies for a few years, then hit the US with a landing force the likes of which has never so much as been imagined. South America would crumple, as those nations don't have the numbers, equipment or training to hold out for very long, Canada would be hit hard as well, then the US would have faced a four point invasion.....the end.
many of the south american countries actually became refuges for alot of the Nazi top brass
stryyker wrote:
Russia was getting buttfucked until Stalingrad/Winter. If Germany could have pushed the French and English to the Channel, it would have been over for England, then Hitler could have focused most of his manpower for an assault on Russia and drove the Russians back to the Urals, which was Hitlers plan from the get go.
The Battle Of Britain effectively killed off any future hope of Hitler invading Britain. Only if he created his European superstate would that have happened. However, I don't think this would have happened for two reasons. One, Even without the US, the allies would have defeated Hitler. It would have taken too long to completely dominate the rest of Europe and Russia whilst under attack from the allies, Russia would have taken a decade alone I reckon. Reason two, the people of the countries invaded would start massive civil wars and militia groups. It would have been extremely hard to set up a unified army.=JoD=Corithus wrote:
If the US had not been involved, England would have fallen by 1942. They simply did not have the manpower or resources to with stand a full on invasion from a technilogically superior force. Don't get me wrong, they would have fought hard, but, ultimately, they would have lost. Then, with the western and southern fronts closed, the full military might of Germany would have landed on Russia in one massive sweep, but in this occasion, as opposed to during Operation Barbarosa, the Germans would have all the oil and industrial production they needed, out numbered the Russians, and fielded better equipment. With the advantage of both quantity and quality, and without the HUGE amounts of vehicles and tanks shipped to Russia by Britain and the US, they would have fell in less than a year. Now, the Third Reich would stretch from ocean to ocean, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and as far south as south Africa. In other words, everything not Noth America would be German or Japenese owned. The two would sit back, develop their navies for a few years, then hit the US with a landing force the likes of which has never so much as been imagined. South America would crumple, as those nations don't have the numbers, equipment or training to hold out for very long, Canada would be hit hard as well, then the US would have faced a four point invasion.....the end.
However, if he was successful and invaded Britain too, the US would have been screwed (It is well known that Hitler had the US last on his list and the Germans were developing some of the best weapons at the time; some say they lost the war because they started the war too early and not in time for their scientists to create new weapons). So in effect, you were just as much saving yourselves as saving us Europeans.
Another thing to note, the US became the World's dominating superpower in 1945 because of the war. There was quite a nice little earner in it from the US and the deal that means all the World's oil was sold in dollars, gave the US an open cheque book to cover googleplex sized trade debts (thank god for the Euro, he he). I'm not accusing the US of going to war on the basis of greed, but I don't think "compassion" was the sole ideology of Roosevelt's input into the war (especially when the US thought a European war didn't affect them and public opinion was antiwar - in fact more antiwar than ever since including Vietnam and the current war in Iraq).
In the end, only one thing won the war and it wasn't the Americans, British or the Russians...it was Hiter's gun as it was his suicide that called it a day for the Germans. Hitler never surrendered, his subordinates did on the basis that the war effort couldn't survive without "Der Fuhrer". Most of them committed suicide, leading to the Treaty of Paris.
if the US hadnt enter war... the allies would lose, why? its simple
germany holds on to europe while japans attention is not america, but russia. Japan invades russia by 2 ways.
1. they move up through northen china
2. they take india and persia and invade caucases and link up w/ german forces.
Russia would have no chance if that happened. England cannot survive without supplies from america. England cannot invade germany coz of 1 big reason... the U-boats, if all german U-boats were to prey on the english channel then england has no chance of sending troops on the beaches of france.
germany holds on to europe while japans attention is not america, but russia. Japan invades russia by 2 ways.
1. they move up through northen china
2. they take india and persia and invade caucases and link up w/ german forces.
Russia would have no chance if that happened. England cannot survive without supplies from america. England cannot invade germany coz of 1 big reason... the U-boats, if all german U-boats were to prey on the english channel then england has no chance of sending troops on the beaches of france.
The whole question is if. Once the USSR started gaining momentum, it turned into a powerhouse. Remember, Japan and the USSR were initially neutral countries, so who really knows whether or not Japan would've attempted an invasion of Russia. But yeah, the Russians would've be screwed either way if they declared total war on eachother.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
if the US hadnt enter war... the allies would lose, why? its simple
germany holds on to europe while japans attention is not america, but russia. Japan invades russia by 2 ways.
1. they move up through northen china
2. they take india and persia and invade caucases and link up w/ german forces.
Russia would have no chance if that happened. England cannot survive without supplies from america. England cannot invade germany coz of 1 big reason... the U-boats, if all german U-boats were to prey on the english channel then england has no chance of sending troops on the beaches of france.
Last edited by Spearhead (2006-07-11 18:29:41)
See that? Everyone see that? Look where he's from, look. NOT America.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
if the US hadnt enter war... the allies would lose, why? its simple
germany holds on to europe while japans attention is not america, but russia. Japan invades russia by 2 ways.
1. they move up through northen china
2. they take india and persia and invade caucases and link up w/ german forces.
Russia would have no chance if that happened. England cannot survive without supplies from america. England cannot invade germany coz of 1 big reason... the U-boats, if all german U-boats were to prey on the english channel then england has no chance of sending troops on the beaches of france.
Theres Jews aswell? But we didnt have a country...back then...puckmercury wrote:
except Russia - they endured staggering losses, more than any other faction combinedSpark wrote:
One of teh reasons it's a good thing I'm an impartial observer.
I stand by my point. No country should be given special mention for WWII.
Apart from the fact that Japan wasn't interested in Russia (they made a point of remaining nuetral), going through China would be near impossible (the reason that Russia lost the Russo-Japanese War), and they wouldn't have had the manpower to go the long way around.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
if the US hadnt enter war... the allies would lose, why? its simple
germany holds on to europe while japans attention is not america, but russia. Japan invades russia by 2 ways.
1. they move up through northen china
2. they take india and persia and invade caucases and link up w/ german forces.
Russia would have no chance if that happened. England cannot survive without supplies from america. England cannot invade germany coz of 1 big reason... the U-boats, if all german U-boats were to prey on the english channel then england has no chance of sending troops on the beaches of france.
Incorrect, the US suffered 6 civilian deaths, all picnickers in Oregan and were killed by a japanese balloon bomb.Spearhead wrote:
Also, keep in mind, the US suffered an estimated zero civilian deaths whereas the British suffered about 70,000, according to wikipedia.
http://avstop.com/news/jb.html
Russia loose that war because ships where out of a day and admirals were morons , it's well known fact .Bubbalo wrote:
the reason that Russia lost the Russo-Japanese War
And also Tsucima disaster , where whole fleet were lost in the fog because of better japanise naval artillery ..
Towards the end of the war German U-boats were getting utterly creamed by the British Sonar + auto firing mortars. They were called Hedgehogs and turned up in 1943 is Wiki is to be believed.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
if the US hadnt enter war... the allies would lose, why? its simple
germany holds on to europe while japans attention is not america, but russia. Japan invades russia by 2 ways.
1. they move up through northen china
2. they take india and persia and invade caucases and link up w/ german forces.
Russia would have no chance if that happened. England cannot survive without supplies from america. England cannot invade germany coz of 1 big reason... the U-boats, if all german U-boats were to prey on the english channel then england has no chance of sending troops on the beaches of france.
yeah but if there were no american supplies would the U-boats die that easily?.:XDR:.PureFodder wrote:
Towards the end of the war German U-boats were getting utterly creamed by the British Sonar + auto firing mortars. They were called Hedgehogs and turned up in 1943 is Wiki is to be believed.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
if the US hadnt enter war... the allies would lose, why? its simple
germany holds on to europe while japans attention is not america, but russia. Japan invades russia by 2 ways.
1. they move up through northen china
2. they take india and persia and invade caucases and link up w/ german forces.
Russia would have no chance if that happened. England cannot survive without supplies from america. England cannot invade germany coz of 1 big reason... the U-boats, if all german U-boats were to prey on the english channel then england has no chance of sending troops on the beaches of france.
ok leave out the fact that japan would invade from china, they go west to india and persia and meet up w/ the germans at caucases. germany and japan were allied, they would defitnantly want to win the war.
impossible to answer. I am pretty certain though that England and Russia would have had a very hard time without supplies from the USA.
IMHO, the british wouldn't have been able to stage an invasion of mainland europe on their own and would have been stuck on their little island, their resources slowly draining, while the Axis would have been able to concentrate all efforts on stopping russia in the east. Wether that would have been a success is difficult to answer.
IMHO, the british wouldn't have been able to stage an invasion of mainland europe on their own and would have been stuck on their little island, their resources slowly draining, while the Axis would have been able to concentrate all efforts on stopping russia in the east. Wether that would have been a success is difficult to answer.
The US supplies have nothing to do with the question. The OP meant entering the war as sending troops in 41......B.Schuss wrote:
impossible to answer. I am pretty certain though that England and Russia would have had a very hard time without supplies from the USA.
IMHO, the british wouldn't have been able to stage an invasion of mainland europe on their own and would have been stuck on their little island, their resources slowly draining, while the Axis would have been able to concentrate all efforts on stopping russia in the east. Wether that would have been a success is difficult to answer.
@Longbow: У меня карма кончилась. Кстати, она не шлёт кириллицу, только какой-то цифровой код. Так что пиши на транслите. Я б тебе тоже добавил, но вчера всё раскидал.
Насчёт Т-34. Средним он был самый лучший, а из тяжёлых лучший танк был имхо Пантера.
Кстати странно, что нубы-америкосы не стали доказывать как сильно их Шерманы "рулили".
Насчёт Т-34. Средним он был самый лучший, а из тяжёлых лучший танк был имхо Пантера.
Кстати странно, что нубы-америкосы не стали доказывать как сильно их Шерманы "рулили".
At the first part of WW2 Hitler actually signed some form of Alliance treaty with Russia but Hitler got too boastful and broke it after the blitzkreig, which was stupid on his part. If he would have allied with Russia he could've taken down all of Europe and then re-focus on Russia. That is one big factor why Germany lost.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
well if the russians and germans were allies WW2 might of fallen into the hands of the axis. but sadly that would never happen why? coz the nazis hated the commies more than any1 else in history, they viewed the communists evil, filthy etc.VspyVspy wrote:
Thank god for the Russians during WWII. The US definitely helped in the Pacific but I think Europe would be speaking German if not for the Russians.
It is a pity that the Cold War made Western society paint the Soviets in such a bad light for so many years.
edit:
Germany and japan would never get along... if germany takes europe they will invade japan since they think asians are sub-humans.
agreed, but I've heard that mentioned a couple times before. Not many people know about the heavy losses of the Russian soldiers. Not trying to downplay the hardship of the Jews in that timeframe, but at the same time - I certainly don't see how it affects modern day jews unless they endured it / know someone who did. Same with Repairations here in the US.BattlefieldMedic wrote:
Theres Jews aswell? But we didnt have a country...back then...puckmercury wrote:
except Russia - they endured staggering losses, more than any other faction combinedSpark wrote:
One of teh reasons it's a good thing I'm an impartial observer.
I stand by my point. No country should be given special mention for WWII.
Russia lost something like 10.000.000 soldiers because they hadn't the guns for it each 2 mans had 1 gun if your partner was killed you took his gun thats why they lost that many man
The U Boats would have starved G.B. to its knees without the " Lend Lease " program alone, not to mention the " sink on site " orders the US Navy and Air assets were operating on even before its entrance into the War. Its doubtful whether Hitler really wanted to invade England.
also an excellent point! see below.
In Europe, The USSR was pushed back out of its agricultural and industrial regions and had already lost its few all weather ports. It was finished. You can't eat snow and Tundra moss. The US Coast Guard using ice breakers allowed convoys to keep them feed and supplied with the Murmansk run.
The USA kept the USSR so well supplied with munitions that it was common for German soldiers to be sniped at by Anti Tank guns. Without the Murmansk run alone the War was well lost by the USSR.
It was always a source of embarrassment for Russian leaders to know their very existence was owed to the country they despised the most. It creates a very real sense of impotence in an individual to live with such knowledge and explains a lot of what we come across here.
The results of the poll seem to indicate eveyone knows this, altough I doubt they were desired.
also an excellent point! see below.
Japan did not want the USSR in or influencing the region. The Russo Japanese war started because the USSR was trying to establish the trans Siberian railroad. They definitely would have loved to push the USSR out and away from its Pacific access.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
if the US hadn't enter war... the allies would lose, why? its simple
Germany holds on to Europe while japans attention is not America, but Russia. Japan invades...
In Europe, The USSR was pushed back out of its agricultural and industrial regions and had already lost its few all weather ports. It was finished. You can't eat snow and Tundra moss. The US Coast Guard using ice breakers allowed convoys to keep them feed and supplied with the Murmansk run.
The USA kept the USSR so well supplied with munitions that it was common for German soldiers to be sniped at by Anti Tank guns. Without the Murmansk run alone the War was well lost by the USSR.
It was always a source of embarrassment for Russian leaders to know their very existence was owed to the country they despised the most. It creates a very real sense of impotence in an individual to live with such knowledge and explains a lot of what we come across here.
The results of the poll seem to indicate eveyone knows this, altough I doubt they were desired.
Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-07-12 11:12:20)
I voted for the first option. Without the USA and our support of Britain, Germany would have captured the Suez Canal, and effectively cut off all supplies for Britain from India and the other colonies in 1942. Italy would never have been invaded, and with Germany controlling mainland Europe, what can Britain do about it? Very little. Hitler initially didn't even want to commence with an invasion of Britain, he wanted them to either surrender outright, or make peace with them. He of course went on to Operation Barbarossa in the spring of '43, and was knocking on the doors of Moscow within 6 months. His troops were literally 10 miles from the city, and if it wasn't for his blundering, Germany would have captured that city, and forced Russia's surrender.
I highly doubt Japan would ever get involved with Russia after they got their nose bloodied by them in the mid 1930s in a border skirmish. Even after Hitler invaded Russia, Japan never took him up on his offer for them to invade from their end and meet him halfway. They had their hands full with the US by then, and without us, they likely would have gone on to capture New Guinea, Burma, China, India, and Australia. Europe would be speaking German, and the English might be on decent terms with them, if they made peace with Hitler. Japan would have all of Asia, and most of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. America would likely still be here, but we'd be a very minor power.
The Cold War could have occured, but with Germany and Japan being the Superpowers.
I highly doubt Japan would ever get involved with Russia after they got their nose bloodied by them in the mid 1930s in a border skirmish. Even after Hitler invaded Russia, Japan never took him up on his offer for them to invade from their end and meet him halfway. They had their hands full with the US by then, and without us, they likely would have gone on to capture New Guinea, Burma, China, India, and Australia. Europe would be speaking German, and the English might be on decent terms with them, if they made peace with Hitler. Japan would have all of Asia, and most of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. America would likely still be here, but we'd be a very minor power.
The Cold War could have occured, but with Germany and Japan being the Superpowers.
I cant see how you come to the conclusion the USA would not be a world power.
the US became a world power after the Spanish American War