20-02-2005 11:34									#61
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

December 1941, when the Germans both declared war on the US AND had their forces in the USSR turned back, ending their best chance to take Moscow.

	20-02-2005 14:27									#62
	Increase Your PM Length

Interesting question. I think it is obvious that once the US joined the war, German defeat was inevitable, due to the onset of the atomic bomb. Even given German "superweapons", and even allowing Germany to conquer the Soviet Union and the UK, the US still would have utterly destroyed Germany in 1948-1949, using hundreds of atomic weapons dropped from B-36s based in the continental US.

One can easily argue that the Germans could have turned back Overlord, or even beaten the Soviets, but once the US entered the war, there is no way that the Germans could have ultimately prevailed.

The short answer to your question, then, is that the true turning point was the date of the US entry into the war.

	20-02-2005 15:30									#63
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by GePap December 1941, when the Germans both declared war on the US AND had their forces in the USSR turned back, ending their best chance to take Moscow.

naw late imho. battle of britain clinched it. so many wasted resource on what?

	20-02-2005 15:32									#64
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Dr Strangelove Can you possibly imagine the utter wrongness of that? Imagine the "Macarena" sung with a thick Scottish brogue.....OCK! MACKARRRENA!

You can hear that every Friday night on the streets of Edinburgh and Glasgow.

	20-02-2005 17:16									#65
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Dr Strangelove Yeah, but then Wellington would have nearly conquered the continent of Europe save for Napoleon's tenacious opposition eventually bringing him to bay. Meanwhile, and much much worse, the Spanish assume the position of the Scottish, meaning that the entire latin American community would speak Scottish, not Spanish. Can you possibly imagine the utter wrongness of that? Imagine the "Macarena" sung with a thick Scottish brogue.....OCK! MACKARRRENA! Imagine "La Vida Loco", "Felice Navidad" or "Des Colores" accompanied by bagpipes. No, whatever you do, do not switch the positions of France and England.

But to be pedantinc, in North Spain the bagpipes are traditional, because there are some regions (Galicia and Asturias, mainly) of heavy, heavy Celt influence.

	20-02-2005 18:39									#66
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by yaroslav But to be pedantinc, in North Spain the bagpipes are traditional, because there are some regions (Galicia and Asturias, mainly) of heavy, heavy Celt influence.

Don't lay the blame too heavily on the Celtiberians- there were bagpipes in the Islamic world too.


(I do like some bagpipe music though- especially the Northumbrian and Irish pipes. They tend to be softer and less strident than the asthmatic tortured cat sound produced by the Scots' pipes)

http://www.topicrecords.co.uk/acatalog/index2.html

	20-02-2005 18:43									#67
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Asthmatic tortured cat sound.

By the way, just where did you here an asthmatic tortured cat - I gotta here this one, I can barely type I'm laughting so hard.

	20-02-2005 18:55									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by shawnmmcc Asthmatic tortured cat sound. By the way, just where did you here an asthmatic tortured cat - I gotta here this one, I can barely type I'm laughting so hard.

Oddly enough it stems from visiting the parents of a friend when they lived in Plympton, in Devon.


Thye had an absolutely ENORMOUS tabby cat, of an extremely amiable disposition, but of a gargantuan size. It wasn't overweight, or overfed, or heavy boned, just a vast leviathan of pussycatness.


So evenly tempered was this Cat Kong that Jane's father could pick Tigger up and holding him under his arm, pretend to play him like Scottish bagpipes. This of course led us to put on a record of Moira Anderson and Kenneth McKellar having a real hootenanny Hogmanay, replete with trad. Scots' songs celebrating the joys of deep fried Mars Bars, Irn Bru, battered fried pizza and 40 cigarettes a day, to a bagpiped background.


Tigger happened to have a slightly blocked nose (it was summer) so....

	20-02-2005 19:10									#69
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom Don't lay the blame too heavily on the Celtiberians- there were bagpipes in the Islamic world too.

Yes, but Asturias and Galicia were by large, the regions less affected by muslim invantion. While my home city was muslim-conquered in 711 and not conquered by Christians until 1486, Galicia and Asturias were already in the IX century very muslim-free

	20-02-2005 19:15									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by yaroslav Yes, but Asturias and Galicia were by large, the regions less affected by muslim invantion. While my home city was muslim-conquered in 711 and not conquered by Christians until 1486, Galicia and Asturias were already in the IX century very muslim-free

But you don't need to conquer to share cultural influences.

After all, the Alfonsine Tables were produced through a history of lengthy interaction between the Christian and Islamic scientific worlds, and Mozarabic music was common to the Christian and Islamic worlds in the Iberian peninsula, as were Mozarabic and Mudejar architectural styles.


A golden age of human civilization, gone, gone, gone....


(well except for the bagpipes of course....)

	20-02-2005 19:27									#71
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by yaroslav But to be pedantinc, in North Spain the bagpipes are traditional, because there are some regions (Galicia and Asturias, mainly) of heavy, heavy Celt influence.

There was also a migration of celts from Cornwall and Wales to Galatia in the 7th and 8th centuries. They emigrated to Galatia and Brittany to escape the Saxons. There was a study of gene markers that confirmed a genetic link between Wales and Galatia published a few years back. The genetic marker was less prevalent in England. The authors speculated that the findings demonstrated that the Celtic people had been virtually eliminated in England proper, with remnants surviving in Wales and Galatia. They presumed that the Galatians were descendants of the Iberian celts pre-dating the Roman empire. They neglecte to mention that there were records of a celtic migration from the British isles to Iberia.

	20-02-2005 19:29									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom But you don't need to conquer to share cultural influences. After all, the Alfonsine Tables were produced through a history of lengthy interaction between the Christian and Islamic scientific worlds, and Mozarabic music was common to the Christian and Islamic worlds in the Iberian peninsula, as were Mozarabic and Mudejar architectural styles.

Yes, but many of these things come from Toledo, Seville, cities that were under muslim rule or influence. If you go to Asturias and Galicia and later to Toledo or Seville or Malaga or any city on the south, you will see that the influence is much clearer here.

quote: A golden age of human civilization, gone, gone, gone.... (well except for the bagpipes of course....)

Agreed, it was a golden age of civilization, but I am afraid that among the big number of things that Arabs left on the peninsule were not the bagpipes of Galicia and Asturias Nor that I want to dismiss the importance of the muslim civilization on Spain, of course.

	20-02-2005 21:15									#73
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Dissident naw late imho. battle of britain clinched it. so many wasted resource on what?

The resources spent on ther Battle of Britain were small compared to the resources spent on Operation Barbarossa, and had Barbarossa worked, it would have been only a matter of time before the UK would have had to give in.

	20-02-2005 21:37									#74
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Interesting question. I think it is obvious that once the US joined the war, German defeat was inevitable, due to the onset of the atomic bomb. Even given German "superweapons", and even allowing Germany to conquer the Soviet Union and the UK, the US still would have utterly destroyed Germany in 1948-1949, using hundreds of atomic weapons dropped from B-36s based in the continental US.

Had the Reich conquered the USSR and the UK, I think that there would be little the US could do to fight the Reich one on one. By 1949 the Nazis would have had nukes as well, and they wouldn't have hesitated to use them against the US if need be. If Germany had conquered the Soviets, the war would have ended with a Cold War type semi-truce between the US and Nazi Germany (assuming that Japan and the US still go to war, with the US ultimately prevailing.) Would the US risk retalliation by launching a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Reich? No, I don't think so.

I bet that there would even be overtures through inept Nazi Diplomacy suggesting that the US and the Reich should be allies, or at least not be at war with each other, given the large percentage of German blood in the US (something that Hitler believed would ultimately redeem the US).

That's why I think that Stalingrad and Kursk were the two nails in the coffin of the 3rd Reich. Once it was clear that the Nazis weren't going to conquer the Soviets, then it was a matter of time before the Soviets overran Germany.

	21-02-2005 00:54									#75
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by GePap The resources spent on ther Battle of Britain were small compared to the resources spent on Operation Barbarossa, and had Barbarossa worked, it would have been only a matter of time before the UK would have had to give in.

what about the resources required to "hold" Russia. You think the Russians would stand idly by while their country is occupied? Even the pansy french had resistance. You can expect much more from Russia.

	21-02-2005 00:57									#76
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Wycoff Had the Reich conquered the USSR and the UK, I think that there would be little the US could do to fight the Reich one on one. By 1949 the Nazis would have had nukes as well, and they wouldn't have hesitated to use them against the US if need be. If Germany had conquered the Soviets, the war would have ended with a Cold War type semi-truce between the US and Nazi Germany (assuming that Japan and the US still go to war, with the US ultimately prevailing.) Would the US risk retalliation by launching a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Reich? No, I don't think so. I bet that there would even be overtures through inept Nazi Diplomacy suggesting that the US and the Reich should be allies, or at least not be at war with each other, given the large percentage of German blood in the US (something that Hitler believed would ultimately redeem the US). That's why I think that Stalingrad and Kursk were the two nails in the coffin of the 3rd Reich. Once it was clear that the Nazis weren't going to conquer the Soviets, then it was a matter of time before the Soviets overran Germany.

how exactly would germany use nukes against the U.S.? They need an airbase close enough to hit New York city. Although technically they did own greenland right? but I don't think there were any airbases there.

	21-02-2005 00:58									#77
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Dissident what about the resources required to "hold" Russia. You think the Russians would stand idly by while their country is occupied? Even the pansy french had resistance. You can expect much more from Russia.

Well, had the nazis played smart, most Russians would have welcomed them as liberators, because they had just been suffering from the rule of Stalin, one of the worst monsters in history.

That's not exactly the same as France or Yugoslavia, which were not oppressed before the nazi rule, and which had both nationalists and commies poised to fight against the invaders.

	21-02-2005 02:16									#78
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor Well, had the nazis played smart, most Russians would have welcomed them as liberators, because they had just been suffering from the rule of Stalin, one of the worst monsters in history.

Again, this theory is full of holes. Stalin's purges mostly affected the party elite. Ordinary Russians were generally supportive, though other nationalities were not. The "Cult of Personality" was still going strong, and living conditions had improved. The Party had a strong grip on the country and was in no danger of internal revolt.

As for the nazi's playing smart, I assume that means being nice. Not killing or stealing or that sort of thing. That simply isn't possible for nazis. As I said before, they came into the Soviet Union to loot, pillage, kill the Jews and erradicate Communism. They could not have adopted a policy favorable towards the people because it would have been contrary to their reason for invading in the first place.

	21-02-2005 02:22									#79
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

while we're at it - any release date set for HOI 2?

	21-02-2005 02:24									#80
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I sincerely doubt that the usage of nukes against the US would have been more likely than it was in reality. Remember there was little ideologic reason to nuke the US. They were just "degenerate", not "Untermenschen"...

	21-02-2005 03:07									#81
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Wycoff Had the Reich conquered the USSR and the UK, I think that there would be little the US could do to fight the Reich one on one. By 1949 the Nazis would have had nukes as well, and they wouldn't have hesitated to use them against the US if need be. If Germany had conquered the Soviets, the war would have ended with a Cold War type semi-truce between the US and Nazi Germany (assuming that Japan and the US still go to war, with the US ultimately prevailing.) Would the US risk retalliation by launching a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Reich? No, I don't think so. I bet that there would even be overtures through inept Nazi Diplomacy suggesting that the US and the Reich should be allies, or at least not be at war with each other, given the large percentage of German blood in the US (something that Hitler believed would ultimately redeem the US). That's why I think that Stalingrad and Kursk were the two nails in the coffin of the 3rd Reich. Once it was clear that the Nazis weren't going to conquer the Soviets, then it was a matter of time before the Soviets overran Germany.

They had one in 1945 but was not able to used it. There is a book on it.
However we were going to fight the German along if necessary. Read the History of the B-36. It was going to be the German bomber from here or Canada. But the war started to go our way and so it was delay until 47.

	21-02-2005 03:09									#82
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

you what? German nuke in 45? tell that to the tourists, it's just another conspiracy theory.

	21-02-2005 03:11									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Shogun Gunner Sure, the air force was decent -- at least the Spitfires and Hurricanes. But the Germans could match those planes with the ME-109 and pilots of equivilant skill.

The 109 was a good airplane but it was slower then the Spitfire and couldn't turn as fast nor climbing as fast. Gering visited German pilots in northern France at the height of the battle of Britain and he asked the pilots what he could do to help them. The pilots responded with "Give us Spitfires".

	21-02-2005 03:19									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Dissident how exactly would germany use nukes against the U.S.? They need an airbase close enough to hit New York city. Although technically they did own greenland right? but I don't think there were any airbases there.

No German soldier remained in Greenland for more than 24 hours during the course of the war.

They made a couple of landing attempts to set up weather stations and communications facilities in Greenland in the early years of the war, but each time they were thrown back into the sea shortly by Danish military patrols. It was mostly in the North-Eastern parts of Greenland IIRC.

After these sporadic, failed attempts to maintain a presence, the Germans never bothered with Greenland again.

The Faroe Islands were occupied by Britain shortly after the German occupation of 'Denmark proper' on 9 April 1940, and Britain continued to hold the islands without German interference until the end of the war.

And Iceland, which was Danish at the time, was occupied on the outbreak of war, first by Britain and later by the US, and to my knowledge Germany never bothered with Iceland either.

	21-02-2005 03:21									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ecthelion while we're at it - any release date set for HOI 2?

You can order it from Paradox's E-Butik now if you want the game.

	21-02-2005 03:23									#86
	Suffering from ads?

Butik = Strickstübchen, no?

	21-02-2005 03:27									#87
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

When Ted Striker entered the war.

	21-02-2005 03:29									#88
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Winston No German soldier remained in Greenland for more than 24 hours during the course of the war. They made a couple of landing attempts to set up weather stations and communications facilities in Greenland in the early years of the war, but each time they were thrown back into the sea shortly by Danish military patrols. It was mostly in the North-Eastern parts of Greenland IIRC. After these sporadic, failed attempts to maintain a presence, the Germans never bothered with Greenland again. The Faroe Islands were occupied by the Britons shortly after the German occupation of 'Denmark proper' on 9 April 1940, and Britain continued to hold the islands without German interference until the end of the war.

interesting, thanks for the info.

and even if they did have a base, I don't think germany had long range bombers did they? I'm not sure how many miles it is to NYC, but it's quite a bit. just checked. It looks to be well over 1000 miles on my atlas.

They would have had to use a sub, and manually plant it in NYC with spies etc.

	21-02-2005 03:51									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Ideally for the Germans Hitler should have died a week or two before the invasion of Poland then they would have got to keep the territorial gains he made but war still could have been averted. If that had happened then Hitler would likely be remembered as one of the great Chancellors in German history.

very interesting thought indeed.

	21-02-2005 03:59									#90
	Increase the size of your Attachments

would that have been good? when this country was remembering the July 20 '44 assassination, I came across another interesting thought: if Hitler had died in that attempt, he would have become a martyr and people would still say we could have won the war had he survived. how good would it be for Germany and the rest of the world if the territorial gains in the east would still be ours (there would still be war with France and the UK, mind), and the person who at the same time had Jews and political opponents put in concentration camps would have dies at the height of his fame?