Did the US save Europe in WW2?

syscom3 · May 10, 2007

plan_D said:
The CBI theatre would be an exact replica of the real events; which relieves troops in 1945 as the war with Germany would still be ongoing.

Agrre'd. But by the time they can go to Europe, the war has been decided for Russia or Germany.

Canada provided thousands of aircraft, tanks and trucks to the Allied war effort - their industry was not huge, but more than capable of expansion. And India, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa all provided resources, men and machine to the war effort.

You need 100's of thousands of trucks, 10's of thousands of aircraft and thousands of ships. Australia, SA and Canada didnt have the resources to do it. Plus much of the production from Australia would be going to support its own forces in the Pacific.

The British Empire had more men than the U.S - that's a simple fact. So, man power was not to be a problem. You're thinking of what did happen, rather than what could have happened. The U.S provided all these men and material - so Britain didn't have to; it doesn't mean Britain didn't have the people at its disposal.

Incorrect. You are counting the vast hordes of colonial people who were illiterate and could not be expected to perform to the high standards needed to defeat Germany.

On top of that, the Soviet Union would still be pressurising the German forces in the East. And the RAF was in a good position for offensives during 1943 - and I say again, we bombed by day and night.

And without the US and thus the Brits to worry about, more men and material can be moved to the eastern front.

The fact is; a Soviet and British alliance had more industrial capacity than Germany and had more men. In the war of attrition - they'd lose and that's what it became.

Britain alone didnt have the industrial might to defeat Germany. Russia had lots of industrial power, but squandered lots of it because of the conditions it had to fight in.

Germany weren't that far advanced; 1945 - Britain had the Centurion; equal to any German AFV. We had fighters equal to any of the Luftwaffe; tactical bombers that were superior; and strategic bombers that were far superior. Our electronics were always one step ahead. Germany was never going to have a massive technical advantage.

Germany's tanks and AFV's were superior right unto the last few months of the war (63 out of 68 months is quite impressive). And if the US hadnt enabled the Brits to invade Normandy in 1944, none of your centurion tanks would see combat in numbers.

Fighters equal to the LW? yes, but you need magnitudes better than, or in numbers far in excess of the LW to destroy it.

The RAF if needed to, would have eventually been sending escorted heavy raids by day to Germany - but we didn't need to, 'cos America was doing it.

Only one problem with that, you dont have the resources to do it by day AND night. Forget that the US had 2500 heavy bombers, and another 4000 tactical bombers and fighters to provide for the fight? I dont think the brits had the resources to expand beyond what you already had.

The facts are clear. Britain had to raise an army and navy large enough to defeat Germany by middle 1945. You simpky didnt have the mapower, resources and time needed to do it.

By early 1945, we can be sure of one of the following:
1) Germany and Russia had fought themsleves to a draw. Germany is still firmly in place in Europe.
2) Germany beats Russia in 1943, and again, Germany not only controls Europe, but is in a position to threaten the middle east.
3) Russia beats germany and controls Europe.

RATHED · May 10, 2007

Well , I n my opinion, in creating this scenario we can´t even consider the possibility of Japan attacking Pearl Harbor and the US fighting only in the Pacific. It is not credible at all. Either they stay out of the war or they would fight it in both theaters. FDR wanted to get in to the war anyway, Pearl Harbor was just what finally decided it. Yeah, I know the germans declared war first , but that is just a tecnacality

DerAdlerIstGelandet · May 10, 2007

syscom3 said:
Incorrect. You are counting the vast hordes of colonial people who were illiterate and could not be expected to perform to the high standards needed to defeat Germany.

That is a bit far fetched I think. You dont have to be smart to follow orders and have a fighting spirit.

syscom3 · May 10, 2007

RATHED said:
Well , I n my opinion, in creating this scenario we can´t even consider the possibility of Japan attacking Pearl Harbor and the US fighting only in the Pacific. It is not credible at all. Either they stay out of the war or they would fight it in both theaters. FDR wanted to get in to the war anyway, Pearl Harbor was just what finally decided it. Yeah, I know the germans declared war first , but that is just a tecnacality

There was almost a week difference between declaring the war. And untill Germany declared war, there was less than unanomous support for declaring war on Germany.

And Japan was going to declare war on the US regardless of what germany was going to do.

syscom3 · May 10, 2007

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
That is a bit far fetched I think. You dont have to be smart to follow orders and have a fighting spirit.

You need literate people to maintain the machines, and fly the planes. And unless you just want to use the bodies as cannon fodder, then having them smart enough to be able to fight with some probability of defeating the GA is a distinct advantage.

RATHED · May 10, 2007

Something that people are forgeting: Well , we all agree that the most important ground front would be on Russia. Let´s say the soviets are finally wining, and begin to pushing back the germans. We still don´t have a ground front in France, nor the possibility of one in the short term. Anyone really believe the Brits would keep supporting the soviets when they started pouring in to Europa?

I know that Churchill said he would make partners even with the Devil against Hitller, but this is BS. In real life it would come down to "Real Politikcs". The Brits ( and the US, even if it was out of the war) did not wanted a nazified continental Europa, but they did not wanted a communist one either.

Most likely, the support would be reduced as soon as it becomes clear that western Europa is whitin the grasp of Stalin. The political and strategic aim for the Brits would be to keep the Russians strong enough to keep Germany occupied and depleted, but not enough to defeat it completely, in the hope the England would at some point grow strong enough or would get the support of the US to "liberate" western Europe.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · May 10, 2007

syscom3 said:
You need literate people to maintain the machines, and fly the planes. And unless you just want to use the bodies as cannon fodder, then having them smart enough to be able to fight with some probability of defeating the GA is a distinct advantage.

You obviously have not served in the military then...

RATHED · May 10, 2007

syscom3 said:
There was almost a week difference between declaring the war. And untill Germany declared war, there was less than unanomous support for declaring war on Germany.

And Japan was going to declare war on the US regardless of what germany was going to do.

This a whole other discussion, I don´t wanna get in to now. We will just disagree on that. In my scenario, I will always consider that Pearl Harbor never happened.

rogthedodge · May 10, 2007

In short yes, but the US couldn't have won it without the UK, the UK couldn't have won it without the Empire or the Poles etc etc.

Most Brits I know wouldn't dispute the US's help was decisive, it's the post-war usuary terms of economic help and the more-recent crowing that tends to inflame opinions

Emac44 · May 11, 2007

I like that Sys considers vast amounts of people in the Commonwealth were iliterate. By any standard this is a high over stating his ignorance of the British Empire. Who educated most Dominion Indigenous Populations far more than any Colonial or Empire Powers had done before. And how long have you thought Australians New Zealanders Canadians South Africans Malays Singaporeans etc are dumb as dog **** Sys? And according to your thread the US wasn't in the War WHICH MEANS NEITHER WAS JAPAN THAT BROUGHT THE USA INTO THE WAR WHEN IT ATTACKED PEARK HARBOUR AND PHILIPPINES. And as soon as Japan had attacked the USA and her overseas possessions less that in a 48 hours Germany and Italy declared war on the US. You are concentrating on this being a European War. Which it wasn't after December 1941 when it became Global. And with Japan not part of this scenerio your opinions of the Commonwealth supplying Great Britian is based on that Japan was in WW2 after December 1941. Which wouldn't have been the case as Japan would not have been involved as according to you US was NOT INVOLVED AND HENCE NEITHER WAS JAPAN

And Sys who are you to consider PEOPLE OF THE EMPIRE WERE AS DUMB AS DOG ****. When the British set about educating the natives of the EMPIRE NATIONS unlike the France Belguim and Holland at the same time.

I am sorry but I am taking exception to these overtures of people who were natives in the Commonwealth and the British Empire from Sys. it has gone to sheer arrogance in my opinion

lesofprimus · May 11, 2007

Oh Jesus...

syscom3 · May 11, 2007

Emac44 said:
I like that Sys considers vast amounts of people in the Commonwealth were iliterate.

Vast numbers of the colonial people were illiterate, such as the populations in India, Nigeria, etc.

And how long have you thought Australians New Zealanders Canadians South Africans Malays Singaporeans etc are dumb as dog **** Sys?

I never considered them to be illiterate, as most were populated by whites who did have an educational adavantage over the other colonial peoples

And according to your thread the US wasn't in the War WHICH MEANS NEITHER WAS JAPAN THAT BROUGHT THE USA INTO THE WAR WHEN IT ATTACKED PEARK HARBOUR AND PHILIPPINES.

Japan was going to attack the US and others regardless of what Germany was going to do. I've always stated in this thread that this war was going to have the US at war with Japan, but not Germany.

And as soon as Japan had attacked the USA and her overseas possessions less that in a 48 hours Germany and Italy declared war on the US. You are concentrating on this being a European War. Which it wasn't after December 1941 when it became Global.

It was Germany declaring war on the US, that gave us the excuse to declare war on them. If Germany had stayed on the sidelines after Dec 7th, then there is every indication the US would have stayed out of the European war.

And with Japan not part of this scenerio your opinions of the Commonwealth supplying Great Britian is based on that Japan was in WW2 after December 1941. Which wouldn't have been the case as Japan would not have been involved as according to you US was NOT INVOLVED AND HENCE NEITHER WAS JAPAN

Go back to the start of the thread and quite me where I said that the US would stay out of the war in the pacific.

And Sys who are you to consider PEOPLE OF THE EMPIRE WERE AS DUMB AS DOG ****. When the British set about educating the natives of the EMPIRE NATIONS unlike the France Belguim and Holland at the same time.

But why was there huge illiteracy problems in more than a few countries after decolonization? And I am not reffering to ANZAC, or Canada.

My point is that just because Britain had a few hundred million subjects in India, it didnt mean that there was a vast pool of manpower to tap to be thrust into a war that was beginning to be shown to be quite a technical affair to be run.

I am sorry but I am taking exception to these overtures of people who were natives in the Commonwealth and the British Empire from Sys. it has gone to sheer arrogance in my opinion

Unfortunatly, facts can be disheartening to people.

It still stands, and noone has proven me wrong......

The UK did not have the industrial or manpower capacity to defeat Germany on its own. Only Russia did.

End result is (mainland) Europe speaking German or Russian.

Bernhart · May 11, 2007

getting the feeling that sys loves POing people. At least hope its that and he isn't what his post make him seem to be.

syscom3 · May 11, 2007

Bernhart said:
getting the feeling that sys loves POing people. At least hope its that and he isn't what his post make him seem to be.

PO'ing people?

DerAdlerIstGelandet · May 11, 2007

Pissing off people....

lesofprimus · May 11, 2007

getting the feeling that sys loves POing people. At least hope its that and he isn't what his post make him seem to be.

Sys has excelled in the art of pissing members off since his inception into our midst 2 years ago... I would never expect, or want him to, change in any way...

syscom3 · May 11, 2007

You have to have a thick skin to last here in this forum.

lesofprimus · May 11, 2007

God, I love u man...

FLYBOYJ · May 11, 2007

DerAdlerIstGelandet · May 12, 2007

As long as he does not turn into a (and I never have thought he would) Lunatic, sys will be sys.

Did the US save Europe in WW2?

What language would Europe be speaking if the US stayed out in WW2?

Russian

German

Neither

Pacific Historian

Airman

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Pacific Historian

Pacific Historian

Airman

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Airman

Airman 1st Class

Staff Sergeant

Brigadier General

Pacific Historian

2012 Forum Fantasy Football Champion

Pacific Historian

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Brigadier General

Pacific Historian

Brigadier General

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads