This is a very unlikely and unproved assumption,as : no Torch does not make Overlord possible in 1943.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
This is a very unlikely and unproved assumption,as : no Torch does not make Overlord possible in 1943.Have I missed something?
The war would have been over in 1943.
Pearl Harbour coincided with the final failure of Barbarossa and the start of the Soviet Winter Offensive,and Rommel's first retreat in North Africa .So many things in wartime hinge on what precedes them. When your alternate reality departs from the historical record, you really don't know what would happen.
No Axis is going to change Hitler's calculations as to what he can get away with. Ditto Japan. Many of Hitler's southeastern allies only came on board after the successful campaign in France. Japan's aggression was timed to coincide with the high water mark of Axis expansion in the Soviet Union and North Africa.
we all have people who drink the kool-aid my friendUnfortunately the propaganda brainwashing has been highly successful here in the USA.
This is an absolute and exaggerated claim : Japan did not lose because it had not enough oil, with more oil it would also use .Pearl Harbor happened when it did due the the Japanese steadily running out of oil after the US led oil embargo. IIRC the approximate date of the attack was determined by the Japanese high command, based on a minimum of 13 months of oil required to have any chance of winning a war with the US. The 13 months required was the amount needed to accomplish the operations laid out in their war plan, plus a reserve. Japan waited until they only had an additional 2 month of oil over the minimum.
David Glantz, the American military historian known for his books on the Eastern front, concludes:We Americans helped in the fight. We didn't win it. Fully 60% of all, repeat all, Wehrmacht casualties were incurred on the Eastern Front. Of the remaining 40%, I doubt us Americans counted up to half of them.
America played a part in saving the world, but it was only a part.
David Glantz, the American military historian known for his books on the Eastern front, concludes:
Although Soviet accounts have routinely belittled the significance of Lend-Lease in the sustainment of the Soviet war effort, the overall importance of the assistance cannot be understated. Lend-Lease aid did not arrive in sufficient quantities to make the difference between defeat and victory in 1941–1942; that achievement must be attributed solely to the Soviet people and to the iron nerve of Stalin, Zhukov, Shaposhnikov, Vasilevsky, and their subordinates. As the war continued, however, the United States and Great Britain provided many of the implements of war and strategic raw materials necessary for Soviet victory. Without Lend-Lease food, clothing, and raw materials (especially metals), the Soviet economy would have been even more heavily burdened by the war effort. Perhaps most directly, without Lend-Lease trucks, rail engines, and railroad cars, every Soviet offensive would have stalled at an earlier stage, outrunning its logistical tail in a matter of days. In turn, this would have allowed the German commanders to escape at least some encirclements while forcing the Red Army to prepare and conduct many more deliberate penetration attacks in order to advance the same distance. Left to their own devices, Stalin and his commanders might have taken twelve to eighteen months longer to finish off the Wehrmacht; the ultimate result would probably have been the same
i just am too niceWhat? A complete post (#467) in perfect English with no grammar errors, no misspelling, no fragmented thoughts. What happened?
i know but without logistics you cannot win ill say it this wayYeah, and those Dodge trucks and 15 million pair of boots moved Soviets soldiers into battles that accounted for 60% of all Wehrmacht casualties. You seem to think the passage you've quoted contradicts what I'm saying. It doesn't.
The Allied effort was a team effort. Saying that "America won the war" is a vast oversimplification which derogates the contributions and sacrifices of the many Allies, and invites invidious comparisons to be made.
i know but without logistics you cannot win ill say it this way
Polish, Czech, Dutch, Norwegian, French, British, Russian, Ukrainian, ANZAC all proved their worth and without them, the war would have been longer and harder but the US was the pipe line in which their operations could be logistically successful
yeahI know this; you're talking to someone who has been reading about this subject since long before you were born.
yeah
am i the youngest kid here?Now get off'n my lawn! <waves cane furiously>
am i the youngest kid here?
i feel alone
I had to give him a like for that.What? A complete post (#467) in perfect English with no grammar errors, no misspelling, no fragmented thoughts. What happened?
yipeeeI had to give him a like for that.
without conflict there is no fun in lifeThere may be someone else but the quality of his posts might make him seem older than his years.