World War II

Discussion in 'Historical Events Coffee House' started by NateAwesome, Feb 13, 2011.

  1. D3adtrap www.twitter.com/d3adtrap | Mr. Choc: Coco Fruits

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    www.Twitter.com/d3adtrap

    True. There just might have been stale mate at some point, but once eighter one atacks line is going to move one way or other.
  2. xXxLKxXx Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 20, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,556
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Des Moines, IA
    I think France would still have lost to Germany's tactics and superior equipment but it would have given other countries the time to prepare an assualt agaisnt Germany that would have ended it early. Then there only Japan.
  3. Maddog95 Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Message Count:
    572
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Location:
    Belgium
    Just to awesome things up a bit.

    [IMG]
    "He liked a cigarette, he liked a bottle of beer - he drank a bottle of beer like any man."

    For centuries, Poland has been known specifically for two things – badass spicy sausages, and getting epically fucked over by every other European nation in every possible way. Polish people are constantly getting about as much respect as the Duke University football program, and the once-proud nation has been carved up more times than Joan Rivers’ face. The early days of World War II was no exception, when the unsuspecting, peaceful Poles all of a sudden found themselves getting sneak-attack double-teamed by the international military superpower dickheads Germany and the Soviet Union. Sure, the Communists and Fascists fucking hated each other, but apparently they were willing to join forces and work together to oppress the citizens of Poland, steal their land, and imprison anyone they damn well pleased.

    Of course we know about what the Germans did to the people of Poland, but it certainly wasn’t any picnic being on the receiving end of the sickle and hammer either. Captured Polish POWs that weren’t executed on the spot by the Russkies were shipped out to fucking hardcore Gulags in Siberia, where the spent twelve hours a day eating disgusting borscht and gruel, mining snow from ice caves with pickaxes like the Dwarves in Snow White and toiling away in temperatures that never got above negative fifty degrees in the summertime. However, once Germany double-crossed the Soviets and started beating the holy living shitburgers out of the Red Army, Josef Stalin all of a sudden had a change of heart and decided to let captured Polish POWs out of prison so they could help fight for the Allies. Since the Poles weren’t too keen on fighting on behalf of the Russians who had oppressed and imprisoned them, they decided to serve under the British instead. A large number of these men were put on trains and sent to Iran, where they formed up into the Polish Second Army Corps. II Corps’ first mission was to travel to Palestine, link up with the British 8th Army and assist in the Allied invasion of Italy.

    Continue reading:
    http://www.badassoftheweek.com/voytek.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voytek
  4. Benerfe Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 20, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    199
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    El Presidente's Childhood Museum
    Heres my theory on your guy's Germany vs Russia ' How could Germany pull it off scenario'

    First. and most important. The famous theory, Rommel In Russia, Manstien In Africa. Rommel > Manstien, Considering the outcome of Africa,this would be a gamble you would have to rely more on the Italians and Graziani which could have been a disaster, but maybe could have worked,if you believe in Army Group Don!, Egypt + Oil fields +possible more Axis nations (Iraq) joining and a new front for Russia to deal with.

    Second.Prepared for bloody winter! Much of the Wehrmacht and its allies were totally not ready, most in there spring uniforms. If they would have been good boy scouts they would packed there German parkas and everything they wouldn't be begging/stealing blankets from people, also since Germany was focusing on Tech, engines that you leave turned off in the bitter cold without freezing over the engine would be great!

    Third. Try not to let your bombers or the enemy do scorched earth on your precious/future supplies!

    Fourth. Have Japan contribute from the east, have them rip up the so called armistice between them and Russia. Its possible for Russia to lose in a war in the east,not usually the west. Russo/Japanese war people..

    Fifth. Although the Blitzkrieg tactic is great. Attacking places everywhere at a blink of an eye, its great and all I would have just focused on Moscow like the rest of you. Sure taking a city named after your adversary is great but I mean capitals mean everything. Opinions/Corrections? :geek:
  5. D3adtrap www.twitter.com/d3adtrap | Mr. Choc: Coco Fruits

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    www.Twitter.com/d3adtrap


    There is so many holes in your theory:

    What on earth could japan do? Freeze to death in siberia?
    Germans didnt have winter uniform only in 1941.
    After 1941 germans lost so many men that they formed one superior army witch would atack.
    How are you going to stop schorthered earth- tactic?? HOW!?!?!??!

    The only proper theory you have is Rommel in east, but again he is only one man.
  6. lukakiwi Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    98
    yet he is one of those rare men which i would trade 100 soldiers for, even more.
  7. D3adtrap www.twitter.com/d3adtrap | Mr. Choc: Coco Fruits

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    www.Twitter.com/d3adtrap
    Those one hundred man wont last you a day on front (Lol) But ya I get the point
  8. pedro3131 Running the Show While the Big Guy's Gone

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    3,949
    Likes Received:
    633
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Tempe, Az
    Rommel was worse then Manstein, Guderian, and Model... Arguably Kleist and Rundstedt and even Kluge were his equals.

    While certainly an able commander, Rommel wasn't some sort of God amongst men, and it is unlikely that his presence would have made much of a difference. Especially when you consider he wasn't highly regarded until after his Africa campaign, meaning that during the invasion he probably would only be a divisional commander (indeed, his command in Africa was originally only a division level) so it is highly unlikely he wold be able to wield much influence.
  9. D3adtrap www.twitter.com/d3adtrap | Mr. Choc: Coco Fruits

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    www.Twitter.com/d3adtrap
    Good point, Pedro. Its much more diffucult to command large armies than smaller platoons etc. And in east armies were titanic
  10. pedro3131 Running the Show While the Big Guy's Gone

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    3,949
    Likes Received:
    633
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Tempe, Az
    Well not just that, but the fact is if he only had a division, he would just be one division under hundreds. He wouldn't have operational command, basically meaning he would have to follow the orders of his army and army group commanders, negating what tactical prowess he did have. It's possible he could have recreated the success of his french campaign, but again, just being one division along a front of over 166 (if you believe the wikipedia citations) it's hard to see him having a huge effect on the outcome of the battle.
  11. anthonywcl Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Message Count:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Malaysia
    What will be the scenario if Japan didn't attack Pearl Harbor & USA didn't wage war against the Japanese?
  12. D3adtrap www.twitter.com/d3adtrap | Mr. Choc: Coco Fruits

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    www.Twitter.com/d3adtrap
    Prettymuch same as before war with the states; They would continue to expand in asia. Take vietnam, maybe?
  13. Maddog95 Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Message Count:
    572
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Location:
    Belgium
    Japan flipped the war.

    If they hadn't attacked Pearl Harbour US wouldn't have joined the war and the Germans wouldn't have had to declare war on the US.

    While the British Army in the theatre was formidable (especially the M3's were being put to much good use) I don't think they would have been able to prevail without the submarines of the US Navy.
    In all honesty, the submarines won the war as much as the Marines did. 56% of all the Merchantmen of the Japanese were sunk putting huge dents in the Japanese ability to supply their troops.

    Also, battles like Midway and Coral Sea basicly crippled the Japanese Navy and left the Royal Navy/US Navy roam about at their own leisure.

    At best they could've pushed the Japanese from Burma and continue sweeping North and clear the islands later, at best...
    More likely: the Japanese pressure would've become to great and they would have to sue for peace.
  14. D3adtrap www.twitter.com/d3adtrap | Mr. Choc: Coco Fruits

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    www.Twitter.com/d3adtrap
    ^^^Yup and they could have pottentialy invade Australia at some point
  15. Benerfe Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 20, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    199
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    El Presidente's Childhood Museum
    What would happen if the panzer tanks reacted the moment D-day happened? Instead of waiting for a napping Hitler?
  16. Maddog95 Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Message Count:
    572
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Location:
    Belgium
    That was Rommel's idea. He wanted the Panzer close enough to the beaches that as soon as any significant portion of Allied soldiers stepped on French soil they'd counter attack.
    Unfortunately the person he had to work with wanted the opposite. And drag the Allies in an attrition style war and have them pay bloody for every step of the way and especially cities.

    Hilter in his regular thought process of failure decided a half way agreement. The Panzers were half in cities half in towards the beaches.
    Neither was content with it.

    Eventually Rommel just went behind Hitlers back and pushed the tanks as close as he could manage, often moving them up a couple of metres forward beyond their maximum allowed distance from their original garrison.


    In reality I'm not quite sure.
    The Canadians for sure would've gotten a harder going but I don't think it would've mattered in the end.
    The sheer number of allied soldiers were immense and besides from that they also had their own tanks (DD tanks, M4 Shermans with a canvas to make em float) and most importantly Air dominance which just meant that most Panzers would eventually get destroyed by Mustangs.

    It might've stalled the allied advance for a while and quite bloodied them a bit more. But I don't think it would've halted a breakthrough.
  17. lukakiwi Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    98
    I think US would have still joined war, especially if Japan attacked Australia. Not only was there a large public want to join war in mainly in Europe because most Americans were immigrants; but also the fact that FDR was already suppling Chinese resistance to fight Japan and said that Japan must be checked. (although im not sure how much of a credible source the very last point is 'History Chanel', but he was suppling/supporting resistance)
  18. D3adtrap www.twitter.com/d3adtrap | Mr. Choc: Coco Fruits

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    www.Twitter.com/d3adtrap

    Japanese were already in war with Australians, though they fought out side australia
  19. 123Blazer New Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Message Count:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why didnt hitler send his 20,000 estimated SS gaurds to the Eastern front,But instead they leave them in the heart of germany where there obviously not needed... :/
  20. lukakiwi Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    98
    I said invaded, as in literally invaded, because invasion would increase the pro war sentiment.

Share This Page