21-02-2005 12:50									#121
	Suffering from ads?

I guess so.

	21-02-2005 13:38									#122
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Don't miss the importance of the presence of Georgi Z. in the equation either. He was perhaps the one Red Army General with the hard-headedness and the clout required to stand up to Stalin and prevent that nitwit from throwing away the Rodina's best men and tanks as soon as they came on the line.
Up until Zhukov showed up in the European theatre Stalin had a very similar mindset to Hitler - no retreat and just attack, attack, attack with everything you have as soon as you have it.

I'd vote for the battle of Britain - think of all of those hundreds of thousands of guns and men protecting German and occupied cities from allied airpower rather than duking it out with the Red army ...
Not to mention the 60-odd divisions left behind spread through Western Europe in case of a D-day scenario.

	21-02-2005 15:23									#123
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Dr Strangelove Hitler was the embodiment of good old fashioned European superstition and bigotry transplanted into the 20th century.

What was specifically 'European' about the bigotry?

If anything, Hitler's bigotry stemmed from an ingrained Christian anti-semitism, not a specifically 'European' anti-semitism.

As I recall the good ol' boys of the Klan were none too keen on Jews either, and America (and Australia) had its fair share of 'scientific' racists pursuing nonsensical Social Darwinist theories.

	21-02-2005 16:39									#124
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Germany committed 90% of its forces against the Soviets. I don't think another 10% would have made the difference if the USSR was being propped up. It wasn't the allies military contributions that helped bring down the Germans, but the fact they supplied the Soviets. If it was just a straight up fight between the West and Germany, we'd be speaking German today.

I've heard it was more like 85%, but either way it's a vast majority. But I completely disagree about anyone speaking German. It's one thing win a particular battle or war and quite another to take a primarily land power like the Germans and start invading England / The U.S., just as it was difficult for the primarily sea powered Anglo-Americans to put together a viable second front on the continent while fighting the IJN in the vast Pacific.

I agree that the war was in the bag for the Allies as soon as the Germans declared war on the U.S. (while losing the battle of Moscow). A review of the relevant data seem pretty conclusive on this point. Of course no one at that time had access to the relevant data, and it is possible (remotely) that some combination of improbable coincidences could have sapped allied morale enough so that they threw away their otherwise inevitable victory.

	21-02-2005 18:15									#125
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: only second-rate officers going into logistics, etc. They actually had to halt the offensive one third of the way through France to regroup, repair, etc. Nobody then looked at a map of Russia and made the appropriate comparisons. They'd won an outstanding victory. This lack of logistical reform - the Wehrmacht was still largely horse drawn - guaranteed their getting mired down by the distances involved while invading the Soviet Union.

Not a shed of truth in this statement. Rather the German excellance in logistics is what they were primarily known for in that day. Anyone remember the German General Staff whose primary funtion was joint logistics? This was the area where the MAJORITY of the talent was concentrated.

There was only one offensive halt of any signifigance during the blitz, and that was outside the beachhead at Dunkirk. The reason for that halt had nothing to do with logisitcal failure, but was an order from Hitler in spite of the opposition to the move by his Generals.

I just finished reading Guderian's autobiography and there is no mention of any logistical problems beyond ordinary bumps that you will always have. Similarly Colonel von Luck's auto not only mentions few problems, but his cobat group went straight from the Eiffel mountains along the Channel coast and then straight down to La Rochelle without stopping for more than a day.

It is true that horses accounted for most of Germany's transport, but it was like that for the entire war. This is a direct consequense of the pre-Nazi treaty limitations not logisical failure. And it acutually helped the Germans when fuel became short, as the Germans were never wanting for food in WWII.

	21-02-2005 18:46									#126
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

The use of animal traction was a source of constant supply limitations on the Russian front. Not only was it slow (with operational effects such as lost opportunities to encircle the enemy, or conversely escape), but a horse only has a fraction of the range of a truck (ie it's load potential is quickly consumed by its own fodder as it moves away from the rail line). It was a huge negative factor on German operations, albeit one whose cause and remedy was far outside the scope of the logistical officer to solve.

	21-02-2005 19:20									#127
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

von Mellenthin in his "My Panzer Battles" goes as far as saying that had they had a sufficient number of tracked transports the fate of the eastern campaign would be very different.

	21-02-2005 20:29									#128
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I do not contend that the horses were not slow, but in any case it was not the cause of a non existant operational halt during the opening of the Western Front.

And imagine how slow the Eastern forces would have moved with tracked vehicles with empty fuel tanks in 43. The average infantry division for Germany used half the fuel of an American unit, and they were still experiancing fuel shortages contantly. Doubling the fuel consumtion of divisions that move slowely anyways would not have helped anything. Not to mention the loss of production in other areas to build more tracked vehicles. I think the Germans prioritized correctly in the 30's.

	21-02-2005 20:43									#129
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by techumseh Pure speculation.

But logically based. If the USSR has to fight on two fronts, it's fubared.

The one scenario where Germany doesn't lose is if Japan decides to risk America holding a knife to their throat, seize Indonesia and not attack Pearl, and attacks the USSR. Between Germany and Japan, the USSR goes down to defeat. No way Roosevelt gets Congress to authorize a war on Japan or Germany.

Without the war to rescue America's economy, we go Communist or fascist in the 1940s, and considering the Soviet defeat, probably the latter.

	21-02-2005 23:11									#130
	Put an end to popups!

Now THAT'S loonie commiespeak che

	21-02-2005 23:13									#131
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Yeah

	21-02-2005 23:44									#132
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

It is a bit of a stretch. In fact there were two factions of Japanese militarists, the Strike North Faction, which favored an attack on the Soviets, and the Strike South Faction, which favored an attack on Britain, the Netherlands, and possibly the US.

The Strike North Group was given a chance to prove it's case by the incursions at Nomohan and Khalkin Gol. The Soviet rout of the Japanese forces led to the triumph of the Strike South Faction within the Japanese government and subsequently to Pearl Harbor.

Stalin knew of the decison to attack the western powers before he transferred the Siberians to the German front. But the German offensive on Moscow was stopped BEFORE they were committed to the Soviet counter-offensive. So who's to say? As DS says, it's all speculation.

	21-02-2005 23:54									#133
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Saras Now THAT'S loonie commiespeak che

You don't know how close we were to revolution in the 1930s.

	22-02-2005 00:21									#134
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: When Ted Striker entered the war.

Would it not be the greatest twist of all time if it had been an 90 year old WWII veteran posting Turkish chicks and hollering "I'd hit it" every time someone mentioned a female?

quote: Without the war to rescue America's economy, we go Communist or fascist in the 1940s, and considering the Soviet defeat, probably the latter.

And when we go fascist, what happens to Roosevelt's image? Right down the crapper, I bet.

German defeat in WW2 was not inevitable until the very end--to put down a point where it was inevitable is as if to say the heroic efforts beyond normal call of duty after that point were not necessary...

	22-02-2005 00:27									#135
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Yeah, I think the German defeat was inevitable once they bombed Pearl Harbor. Those Deltas are quite... well, you know.

	22-02-2005 00:49									#136
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara You don't know how close we were to revolution in the 1930s.

but YOU were there!

	22-02-2005 00:57									#137
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara You don't know how close we were to revolution in the 1930s.

Will I get closer by smoking two joints?

	22-02-2005 03:39									#138
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I suggest you learn something of our Depression era politics before making glib statements like that.

	22-02-2005 04:18									#139
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: I suggest you learn something of our Depression era politics before making glib statements like that.

I am sure your knoweldge of the period is just as cursory as the next guy. Being a communist does not give in instinctual knowledge of everything Pinko.

We were no more near a communist revolution than any other of the crackpot political viewpoints. Or in other words no serious or organized threat existed as all.

	22-02-2005 04:23									#140
	Increase the size of your Attachments

By 1940 the threat of revolution was well past.

In fact the Japanese invasion of the Dutch East Indies made very little difference in the Japanese war effort. A few brilliant pieces of sabotage rendered the refineries inoperable, and the Japanese lacked the industrial facilities to fix them. Japan didn't even have sufficient tanker capacity to move the oil. In the long run Japan couldn't win. Their only real chance would have been to somehow force the US to lift the embargo.

Had the Germans forced the Soviets to capitulate the war still might not have been lost. The Germans were already facing growing rebellions in the conquered territories. Even if they managed to force the Russians to cede the Caucasus oil fields there is no guarantee that the resistance would have allowed them to profit from it. In fact the Nazis already had a track record of being extraordinarily inefficient at taping into the resources of their conquered lands. Eventually guerilla warfare would have taken as much toll on the Wehrmacht as the Red Army. That and eventually the US would have developed atomic weapons.

	22-02-2005 04:36									#141
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

The invasion of the Dutch East Indies may not have made much difference to the Japanese war effort as such, but it did significantly worsen the worldwide shortage of rubber, complicating the Allied effort and advancement for a while, and eventually leading to the development of substitute synthetic rubber.

	22-02-2005 04:50									#142
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Even if they managed to force the Russians to cede the Caucasus oil fields there is no guarantee that the resistance would have allowed them to profit from it. In fact the Nazis already had a track record of being extraordinarily inefficient at taping into the resources of their conquered lands. Eventually guerilla warfare would have taken as much toll on the Wehrmacht as the Red Army. That and eventually the US would have developed atomic weapons.

Where do you guys get this stuff. There is no other power at that time that made use of captured armaments industries better than the Germanys. The Czech tank factores, Becker's assault guns at Normandy, etc. Really an unfounded and unsupportable comment.

As for the guerrilas the inteferance they caused the Germans seems large scaled to today, but compared to the total loses of Germany then at the hands of conventional forces their activity caused almost inconsequential damage. The best you can say is that they helped the conventionals do the work through intelligence, but the conventionals still did the work.

Resistance works better when you are simply complicating the enemies life untill the cavalry, conventional forces, arrive. This was the case in Russia, Poland, the Balkans, and France. If the power you are fighting for bows out, like say Russia, your continued resistance is meaningless. The Germans were not Americans, and would meet any inconvienance you put on them with brutality an order higher. Guerrilas are not very hard to beat if you have the will do do so. Most don't today, the Nazi's did.

	22-02-2005 04:53									#143
	Remove this text

quote: Japan didn't even have sufficient tanker capacity to move the oil

Negative once again. They had plenty of tanker capacity when the mounted the invasion. They did, however, suffer horrific merchant marine loses to American and Commonwealth submarine forces starting the day hostilities started. It is doubtful that the Japanese or the Allies had any idea this would be the case.

	22-02-2005 05:06									#144
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Actually the day that hostilities commenced the US was saddled with a defective torpedo design. It took nearly a year before a decent torpedo came into service.

The Germans may have been able to whip into production one or two items from the conquered lands, but agricultural and industrial production in the occupied territories never rose to even half of prewar levels.

Resistance activities in Yugoslavia were so pathetic that the Yugoslavs managed to drive the Axis out of their country before the Red Army reached their border?

The US already had a process for synthetic rubber before the war broke out. Synthetic rubber production began very quickly.

	22-02-2005 05:11									#145
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Resistance activities in Yugoslavia were so pathetic that the Yugoslavs managed to drive the Axis out of their country before the Red Army reached their border?

Not to take anything away from the partisans, but I have a feeling that the Germans were pretty busy elsewhere at the time...

	22-02-2005 05:23									#146
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Actually the day that hostilities commenced the US was saddled with a defective torpedo design. It took nearly a year before a decent torpedo came into service.

It acually took longer than that. However, defective does not mean inoperable. The fact remains there was a holocaust of merchantmen/tankers at the hands of the allies in the first months of the war.

quote: The Germans may have been able to whip into production one or two items from the conquered lands, but agricultural and industrial production in the occupied territories never rose to even half of prewar levels.

Wow, the entire arsenals of the Czech and Austrians, all mechanized equipment of Italy when the time came, All the lage guns of the Maginot Line, sever hundred captured French tanks, hundreds of artillery and anti-air guns left by the Brits at Dunkirk, quite a few T-34s with a new paint job. Surely that is but a pitance.

And am amazed you scoff at "half prewar levels." That is much more credit than I would give the Germans. That is AMAZING. This is inspite of those areas being recent war zones, hostile populations, sabotage, and allied bombing. What the hell is your criteria of success. And again is there a power you think did better?

Ever wonder why a blockade caused the capitulation of Germany in WWI but had no appreciable effect on her in WWII? Ever wonder why starvation was never a problem in Germany up to the very end?

quote: Resistance activities in Yugoslavia were so pathetic that the Yugoslavs managed to drive the Axis out of their country before the Red Army reached their border?

Sp pathetic that the area was routinely held with less thn 50,000 troops throughout the war (compare that with the area and population of the Balkans). Very cute that you think it was the Yugoslaves that forced them out, rather than the Germans withdrawing them to deal with the ohhh, I don't know, eight million man strong Russian Juggernaught about to cut them off by taking Hungry a little north of there.

quote: The US already had a process for synthetic rubber before the war broke out. Synthetic rubber production began very quickly.

And the Germans were very adept and sythetic oil production and other tricks to get more bang out of their fuel supply. Shortages, however, existed still.

	22-02-2005 05:51									#147
	Got spare money?

Coming a bit late to the party but...

Victory became impossible when Stalingrad turned in the Russians favour

Defeat became inevitable in the days following D-Day

	22-02-2005 06:08									#148
	Get a bigger avatar today!

D-Day was a sideshow, the war was won and lost on the Eastern Front.

Stalingrad was indeed a watershed event, but hardly a death blow. There were several instances where the Germans had oppurtunities to inflict a similar catastophies on the Russians in the next year. They simply failed at it.

	22-02-2005 08:02									#149
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos It acually took longer than that. However, defective does not mean inoperable. The fact remains there was a holocaust of merchantmen/tankers at the hands of the allies in the first months of the war.

By 1943 allied interdiction of Japanese ocean freight began to take a toll, but the fact remains that the Japanese were not able to make use of their conquered oil fields even before the allies began to mount an effective blockade, and neveer managed to get the fields fully operable.

quote: Wow, the entire arsenals of the Czech and Austrians, all mechanized equipment of Italy when the time came, All the lage guns of the Maginot Line, sever hundred captured French tanks, hundreds of artillery and anti-air guns left by the Brits at Dunkirk, quite a few T-34s with a new paint job. Surely that is but a pitance.

Were we talikng about captured armaments? I thought we were talking about production.

quote: And am amazed you scoff at "half prewar levels." That is much more credit than I would give the Germans. That is AMAZING. This is inspite of those areas being recent war zones, hostile populations, sabotage, and allied bombing. What the hell is your criteria of success. And again is there a power you think did better?

German destruction of factories and rails in the areas of western Europe they overran was never anywhere as complete as ther destruction wrought by the allies. The mines, factories and transport facilities were largely intact, it's just that the Germans didn't know how to add them to their own production capacity, or were too paranoid to use what was available in the occupied zones. It's not possible to compare allied management of occupied former axis areas since the allies really did destroy virtually every useful facility.

quote: Ever wonder why a blockade caused the capitulation of Germany in WWI but had no appreciable effect on her in WWII? Ever wonder why starvation was never a problem in Germany up to the very end?

This statement is not true. First, in 1942 and 1943 people were starving - in the occupied areas. Germans didn't starve because they were being fed by stolen produce. Had the Germans not mismanaged the agriculture in these areas there would have been plenty of food for both the occupied and the occupier. By late 1944 and 1945 Germans began to starve too. The journals of GIs marching east from Normandy and north form Scicily are repleat with descriptions of the state of malnutrition of the people of Europe

quote: Sp pathetic that the area was routinely held with less thn 50,000 troops throughout the war (compare that with the area and population of the Balkans). Very cute that you think it was the Yugoslaves that forced them out, rather than the Germans withdrawing them to deal with the ohhh, I don't know, eight million man strong Russian Juggernaught about to cut them off by taking Hungry a little north of there.

You're way off in your estimates of the number of axis troops required to occupy Yugoslavia. I looked up the troop dispositions in Yugoslovia in 1943 and 1944. The Germans generally posted between 13 and 17 divisions in Yugoslovia during that time. This is not including non-German formations and it is not including security formations, Luftwaffe, and other support formations. I believe you're off by a factor of 10.

quote: And the Germans were very adept and sythetic oil production and other tricks to get more bang out of their fuel supply. Shortages, however, existed still.

	22-02-2005 09:17									#150
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara The one scenario where Germany doesn't lose is if Japan decides to risk America holding a knife to their throat, seize Indonesia and not attack Pearl, and attacks the USSR. Between Germany and Japan, the USSR goes down to defeat.

That appears to be impossible. The Japanese had to choose either a northern or a southern strategy, not both. Not concentrating on one front would be inviting disaster. They chose the southern expansion route because they were totally trounced early in a battle between the IJA and the Soviets, IIRC, in 1937.