Groundhog Thread v. 2.0 - The most important battle of WW2

[SaparotRob]

Dude, I think it's a robot.

 

[GrauGeist]

.

Dude, I think it's a robot.

No, it's a revisionist who trolls other WWII sites with this garbage, too.

The interesting thing is that after a certain point is contested with an avalanche of hard facts, they shift their stance and go on to other points in the hopes of camouflaging their shift.

All this nonsense has long since hijacked the thread and is tiresome.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Dude, I think it's a robot.

 

[SaparotRob]

.

No, it's a revisionist who trolls other WWII sites with this garbage, too.

The interesting thing is that after a certain point is contested with an avalanche of hard facts, they shift their stance and go on to other points in the hopes of camouflaging their shift.

All this nonsense has long since hijacked the thread and is tiresome.

This has turned into a great thread for me. I've gotten far greater insight to the workings of Parliament in the early days of the Second World War. I may have judged NC more harshly than deserved. The delineation and refutation of various errors brought back knowledge I've long forgotten. Thanks guys. I appreciate your patience with this poster. I enjoyed all the "will you answer the d**n question already" questions too.

 

[Snautzer01]

It is actually seen as very bad behaviour to clap in the commons so I cant see how few doing it is given a comment, maybe the writer is just clueless, whatever it is he certainly fooled you. In the weeks months and years after Churchill took over, can you tell me why anyone would be in a mood to cheer or clap about anything?

Why are MPs banned from clapping?

The SNP's MPs were told to stop clapping in the Commons - when did this rule come in and what's the point of it?

www.bbc.co.uk

"The rules are laid out in the Parliamentary etiquette bible Erskine May, which says: "Members must not disturb a Member who is speaking by hissing, chanting, clapping, booing, exclamations or other interruption."

I saw some footage of said parlemiant. Someone should tell the rules to them.

 

[ljadw]

With WC out of Downing Street and more autocratically inclined people in charge, especially if this occurs before too much civilian death and destruction from the LW, the "daft corporal" could heave a sigh of relief and, with the RN at anchor and a non aggression pact in place, turn his eyes eastward. He thought of the Anglo Saxons as "fellow Aryans" and was uncomfortable about making war on them when he should be busy liquidating Slavs.

That is a major misreading of American politics. The WASPs had the finances and the party machinery, but they had only a tenuous grasp on middle America, thousands of miles from any ocean, and where the votes are. Those millions of people, not feeling any threat, were not going to sanction any hostilities without a galvanizing event like PH.


The AK was originally sent to bail out Il Duce, who got himself in trouble in Ethiopia. With no RN on the scene, why not grab Suez along the way?


WHAT?? All those Slavs and other untermenschen just begging to be liquidated to make Aryan lebensraum? And all that grain and oil can't be allowed to go to waste, can it?

No need to occupy Britain. Neutral, neutralized, and non aggressive, remember?


Japan had a cultural and historical antagonism with Russia dating back a half century or more. Ever hear of the Russo-Japanese War? Besides, the Kwantung Army got badly spanked in the Siberian border skirmishes of 1939, and their honor demanded redress. They were convinced there were large resources of coal, iron ore, and esoteric minerals just across the border.



Certainly you jest? Maintaining a Uboat fleet, a surface navy, a merchant marine, an air force, and a mechanized army and all the training establishments to keep them at a high caliber requires oil, LOTS of it! With Suez and the Med in Axis hands, a sea route for deliveries would not be difficult, and once the Wehrmacht was deep enough into Ukraine, overland directly from Iran would be doable.


You must be suffering from AIDS (Allaround Information Deficit Syndrome)! The myth that GEAcPS was a myth is itself a myth. Far from "rank propaganda", it was a series of conferences and assemblies in which representatives of the various native peoples "liberated" by the Japanese hammered out a framework for "Asia for the Asians", independent of the white man, and protected by Japan. At first it was a thing, but as these representatives began returning home they kept discovering that IJA occupation troops inspired by Col Tsuji were continuing to treat their people as conquered slaves. The army had no concept of "honorable allies", just unruly subjugated vermin.


True enough, and probably would not have until the eventual collision of Japanese ambitions and US territorial interests occurred. This collision was inevitable and had been foreseen and trained for by IJN and USN since before WWI. Japanese military doctrine was spring-loaded to the "ATTACK" position.


See above.


Japan already held the economically lucrative portions of China. Expanding their holdings required lots of manpower, just holding them, not so much. With Malaya, Burma, and India down, Chiang Kai Shek, deprived of supplies, would wither on the vine, as would Mao tse Tung.


Hitler's stronger, better equipped, trained, and supplied forces would perform better than they historically did due to better concentration of resources, and Stalin would need to draw down his eastern forces more than he historically did.


This assertion fails to take into account all the "adjutments" to history that have just been discussed. You seem to be unable to envision any sequence of historical events other than the one you cling to. Open your eyes and your mind. Good Luck!

These adjudments are IFS,and IFS in a discussion about WW2 are only used to make a German victory possible .
India down is such an IF,as valid as an invasion of the Martians : Japan could never occupy India.
About the oil of Iran : saying that this oil could be transported to Germany through Ukraine is nonsense : it could not be done ,because of the distances,because the Russian railways could not do it ,because there were no railways connecting Iran with the Caucasus .
Point .
And,after a defeat of the USSR (which was impossible ) Germany would need less oil .Why would Germany need the oil of Iran if it was at peace ( no war with Britain and the USSR = peace ) when it was at war with these countries, its oil needs were solved by the synthetic oil production .Half of its oil was coming from the synthetic production,20 % from domestic crude production , only 30 % from imports .
Why would Germany's Ostheer be better trained,equipped and supplied ?
The role of the Siberian forces in the Battle of Moscow was insignificant : a few divisions only were used in this battle .
Proof that the Japanese were convinced that there were a lot of coal and iron ore in Siberia and that they would attack the USSR for this reason ? And,it is obvious that you don't know that a few months before Barbarossa, Japan signed a non aggression treaty with the Soviets .
About the Wasps : the reality is that in November 1940 the Americans had to chose between two Wasp candidates .
The grain of the Ukraine is an other myth : Germany did not need this grain in WW2,there was no famine in Germany in 1941 as there was a small one in 1918 .And, it would be impossible to produce this grain and transport it to Germany .

 

[GrauGeist]

These adjudments are IFS,and IFS in a discussion about WW2 are only used to make a German victory possible .
India down is such an IF,as valid as an invasion of the Martians : Japan could never occupy India.
About the oil of Iran : saying that this oil could be transported to Germany through Ukraine is nonsense : it could not be done ,because of the distances,because the Russian railways could not do it ,because there were no railways connecting Iran with the Caucasus .
Point .
And,after a defeat of the USSR (which was impossible ) Germany would need less oil .Why would Germany need the oil of Iran if it was at peace ( no war with Britain and the USSR = peace ) when it was at war with these countries, its oil needs were solved by the synthetic oil production .Half of its oil was coming from the synthetic production,20 % from domestic crude production , only 30 % from imports .
Why would Germany's Ostheer be better trained,equipped and supplied ?
The role of the Siberian forces in the Battle of Moscow was insignificant : a few divisions only were used in this battle .
Proof that the Japanese were convinced that there were a lot of coal and iron ore in Siberia and that they would attack the USSR for this reason ? And,it is obvious that you don't know that a few months before Barbarossa, Japan signed a non aggression treaty with the Soviets .
About the Wasps : the reality is that in November 1940 the Americans had to chose between two Wasp candidates .
The grain of the Ukraine is an other myth : Germany did not need this grain in WW2,there was no famine in Germany in 1941 as there was a small one in 1918 .And, it would be impossible to produce this grain and transport it to Germany .

Nice try, but nope.
Oil from Iran or Iraq (yes, that was a possibility) coukd EASILY be shipped across the Black Sea or from ports in Turkey ((yes that was also possible) to ports in Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy and so on. Germans used Soviet rail systems to transport material where possible, too.
Regarding Ukranian grain stocks, yes, they would have most certainly used (and did use) any available food sources. Transporting ANYTHING from the Ukraine to Germany simply meant using the existing highway or rail system in place through Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Austria, etc.
Just for a refresher - getting grain from the Ukraine to Germany was easier than getting troops and armor from Germany to the Ukraine...which obviously was the case. On a massive scale.

 

[ljadw]

Nice try, but nope.
Oil from Iran or Iraq (yes, that was a possibility) coukd EASILY be shipped across the Black Sea or from ports in Turkey ((yes that was also possible) to ports in Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy and so on. Germans used Soviet rail systems to transport material where possible, too.
Regarding Ukranian grain stocks, yes, they would have most certainly used (and did use) any available food sources. Transporting ANYTHING from the Ukraine to Germany simply meant using the existing highway or rail system in place through Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Austria, etc.
Just for a refresher - getting grain from the Ukraine to Germany was easier than getting troops and armor from Germany to the Ukraine...which obviously was the case. On a massive scale.

 

[GrauGeist]

L ljadw - what's that?
Did facts catch you off guard?
No problem, I'll wait while you do a wiki search and cherry-pick random info for a reply

 

[ljadw]

Who would produce this grain ? And, in the HTL,its importance was insignificant :Germany's food imports came for 90% outside of the USSR .
About the oil : Germany had 8,5 million tons in 1941, 9,4 million in 1942, 10,4 million in 1943 , and it would take at least 10 years before 1 million ton could be transported to Germany . Who would produce the oil of the Caucasus ?
And why would Germany need the oil of the Caucasus if there was peace ?
In most developed countries the economy was running on COAL, not on oil , including the US :
From the EIA (US Energy Information Administration ) US Primary Energy Consumption in 1940 ( in Quadrillion Btu)
Coal : 12.535
Natural gas : 2.665
Oil : 7.760
Total :25.205
And the importance of oil for the European economies was even lower .Till in the sixties .
Barbarossa happened not 10 years ago, but 80 years ago ! In an other society ,that was as different of ours as was the society of Gettysburg .
During the war Soviet trains used wood because there was a shortage of coal, not a shortage of oil . The Soviets had more oil than they needed .The Germans consumed in 1941,1942,1943 less oil than they produced/imported .

 

[GrauGeist]

Who would produce this grain ? And, in the HTL,its importance was insignificant :Germany's food imports came for 90% outside of the USSR .
About the oil : Germany had 8,5 million tons in 1941, 9,4 million in 1942, 10,4 million in 1943 , and it would take at least 10 years before 1 million ton could be transported to Germany . Who would produce the oil of the Caucasus ?
And why would Germany need the oil of the Caucasus if there was peace ?
In most developed countries the economy was running on COAL, not on oil , including the US :
From the EIA (US Energy Information Administration ) US Primary Energy Consumption in 1940 ( in Quadrillion Btu)
Coal : 12.535
Natural gas : 2.665
Oil : 7.760
Total :25.205
And the importance of oil for the European economies was even lower .Till in the sixties .
Barbarossa happened not 10 years ago, but 80 years ago ! In an other society ,that was as different of ours as was the society of Gettysburg .
During the war Soviet trains used wood because there was a shortage of coal, not a shortage of oil . The Soviets had more oil than they needed .The Germans consumed in 1941,1942,1943 less oil than they produced/imported .

LMAO!!!

Oh My God, you are hilarious.
The info you post is SO skewed, it's comical.

I do appreciate a good laugh, so my thanks to you for the comic relief.

In regards to the historical application of the crap you posted, not a single bit ofnit is factual, except for perhaps the names of the countries you mentioned. Those were real, so at least you somehow managed to get that right.

After reading all your posts, I seriously feel you have a future writing for CNN or any of the other new outlets - they would appreciate your "talent".

But here, not so much...

 

[pbehn]

I saw some footage of said parlemiant. Someone should tell the rules to them.

They did the SNP havnt done it since, I originally posted this link about that Show some respect! Furious Bercow rebukes clapping SNP MPs but changed it to one that contained the rule in Erskine May. Another time I remember was when Blair stood down and gave his final speech.

It is a big chamber with hundreds in it, just one or two people clapping can make it impossible to hear the person speaking, especially in the days before microphones.

 

[pbehn]

duplicates.

 

[pbehn]

The role of the Siberian forces in the Battle of Moscow was insignificant : a few divisions only were used in this battle .

A few divisions of troops trained and equipped to operate in winter were significant not only operationally but psychologically too. When they were deployed Germany started to realise this battle is no where near over, or close to being over. From when they were deployed the German army never got closer to Moscow, that is significant.

 

[pbehn]

This has turned into a great thread for me. I've gotten far greater insight to the workings of Parliament in the early days of the Second World War. I may have judged NC more harshly than deserved. The delineation and refutation of various errors brought back knowledge I've long forgotten. Thanks guys. I appreciate your patience with this poster. I enjoyed all the "will you answer the d**n question already" questions too.

We have had some moments of levity, like the carefully woven theory of Chamberlain opposing Churchill in November elections crashing at the news that the poor guy was dead from natural causes.

 

[ljadw]

L ljadw - what's that?
Did facts catch you off guard?
No problem, I'll wait while you do a wiki search and cherry-pick random info for a reply

Coming from the man who imagine that food and oil would be transported from the east to Germany on highways,this is a very good one .
FYI ( Not : for your imagination ) :Germany ( including ) had 3,800 km of non completed highways,thus ....
Germany had only few trucks that could transport oil .Oil transport was done by ship (inland waterways) or by rail, not by road .
Have you any idea how many trucks would be needed to transport every month 80000 ton of oil from Warsaw to Berlin/ the Ruhr ?
Of course not .
Thus ..
The Red Ball Express (using trucks ) failed to supply the advancing US Armies in France, thus how could trucks supply the German economy in oil during WW2 ?

 

[pbehn]

Coming from the man who imagine that food and oil would be transported from the east to Germany on highways,this is a very good one .
FYI ( Not : for your imagination ) :Germany ( including ) had 3,800 km of non completed highways,thus ....
Germany had only few trucks that could transport oil .Oil transport was done by ship (inland waterways) or by rail, not by road .
Have you any idea how many trucks would be needed to transport every month 80000 ton of oil from Warsaw to Berlin/ the Ruhr ?
Of course not .
Thus ..
The Red Ball Express (using trucks ) failed to supply the advancing US Armies in France, thus how could trucks supply the German economy in oil during WW2 ?

I find that food and oil are like RADAR, over rated and unnecessary from a revisionist point of view. Did the German armies construct a water way in their wake (see what I did there) to transport fuel?

PS Ever heard of railways?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

There's nothing wrong being an iconoclast, but I've never seen anyone so attached to that outlook that virtually everything in history that we've all read is "wrong."

If I wrote "The Sun rises in the East", he would probably argue that, first with "The sun doesn't rise, the Earth rotates" pedantry, then by explaining that "East is really West if you go far enough".

 

[ljadw]

I find that food and oil are like RADAR, over rated and unnecessary from a revisionist point of view. Did the German armies construct a water way in their wake (see what I did there) to transport fuel?

PS Ever heard of railways?

I think that I may say that I know more than anyone here about the role,situation and importance of the German railways and water ways during WW2 . I have in my possession
The Collapse of the German War economy 1944-1945 ( Mierzejewski )
Die Reichsbahn im Ostfeldzug (Pottgiesser )
Die Eisenbahnen im Zeiten Weltkrieg (Kreidler )
About the water ways :
ONE example (From Mierzejewski)
In 1940/1941 Germany produced 485 million ton of hard and brown coal,of which 34 million ton were transported by inland waterways (rivers and canals ).There was a fleet of 19000 ships sailing in the water ways with a tonnage of 8,2 million ton, This fleet transported in 1943 82 million ton of freight (37 % was coal ) and Berlin was the biggest harbor and handled 13,5 million ton of freight .
The railways consumed 32 million ton of hard coal .

 

[SaparotRob]

Coming from the man who imagine that food and oil would be transported from the east to Germany on highways,this is a very good one .
FYI ( Not : for your imagination ) :Germany ( including ) had 3,800 km of non completed highways,thus ....
Germany had only few trucks that could transport oil .Oil transport was done by ship (inland waterways) or by rail, not by road .
Have you any idea how many trucks would be needed to transport every month 80000 ton of oil from Warsaw to Berlin/ the Ruhr ?
Of course not .
Thus ..
The Red Ball Express (using trucks ) failed to supply the advancing US Armies in France, thus how could trucks supply the German economy in oil during WW2 ?

So I'm guessing that the Soviet Union needed a lot of trucks to supply its troops as well. If only the Soviet Union could have leased or be loaned trucks from somewhere. The EAllies might have won.