If Hitler Never Invaded The Soviet Union

[Penn44]

With all elite panzers in Wetern Europe instead of bleeding in the Eastern Front, The Anglo-Americans could have only only dream of invading Europe.

Checkmate:

Nagasakibomb.jpg (15.92 KiB) Viewed 693 times

Germany would have glowed like a chemlight in the night.

Penn44

.

[AmonMauser]

With all elite panzers in Wetern Europe instead of bleeding in the Eastern Front, The Anglo-Americans could have only only dream of invading Europe.

Checkmate:

Nagasakibomb.jpg

Germany would have glowed like a chemlight in the night.

Penn44

.

so the Allies would turn to massacring civilians rather than fighting the German military correct?

[Penn44]

so the Allies were turn to massacring civilians rather than fighting the German military correct?

Sounds good don't it? Whatever it took to win the war against Nazi Germany is a good.

Most of these “what ifs” turn out to be Nazi-philes indulging in fantasy in order to envision a more favorable outcome for their beloved Führer and the Nazi state rather than acknowledging reality that it went down in the most deserving and ignoble defeat.

The basic point is Nazi Germany was doomed from the very first shot because the Nazis were too blinded by their racial ideology to see the world as it really existed. The outcome of the war was a foregone conclusion. In a similiar fashion, our present day Nazi-philes are too blinded by their adulation of all things Nazi German to see what a truly doofus state that Nazi Germany really was.

Penn44

.

[ljadw]

Then Germany would have been defeated by the British and her commonwealth alone, as she stood no hope of defeating the British and her commonwealth

What an utter nonsense. As long as Britain was alone with Germany, it was going to lose.

British industrial capacity was only one-third of Germany's in 1939. Germany was Europe's most industrialized nation.

Even worse by 1941 Germany had industrial and resource potential of all of Europe at her disposal.

Germany and Italy had population of 80 mln and 45 mln versus Britain's 45 mln and some mln from dominion's (India was already on verge of rebellion in 1941 and can't be taken into account) so where's the manpower edge?

Not to mention that Germany had most advanced military research like late-war turbojet Me-262, intercontinental Ju-390, Stumgewehr 44, first ever night-combat googles, since Germany was also most technologically advanced country in the world.

German military doctrine, practice, cadres, training, effectivenes were lightning years ahead of British. In fact Germans never lost battle with Angloamericans when odds where equal - only when latter had at least 2-1 superiority in numbers. The Wehrmacht always had an edge over anglosaxon units on the field. Even when Reich was fighting for survival with Red Army, Allies had great problems defeating the reserve units encountered in western front.

Let's assume the Soviets go to war with Japan in 1939 over Nomonhan, Hitler remains neutral and faces Britain. The outcome is: Germany gradually dwarfes Britain in military production, Germany also builds many more uboots than historically ( that means three-times more losses than historically which were umm giant), Germany send three as much panzers to Afrika for Rommel who historically almost knock out tommies, Germany also has more fighters to face carpet bombers, do you realize how catastrophic this would be for the British? With SU busy in Far East Germany would wipe out their outdated empire in a matter of lightning years.

All decisive battles of WWII were won on the eastern front, Allies just used the back door. With all elite panzers in Wetern Europe instead of bleeding in the Eastern Front, The Anglo-Americans could have only only dream of invading Europe.

War with Soviet Union has eaten 80% of german war potential yet Germany still was a hard-to-defeat enemy for the western allies. No, sorry you just have no arguments for this theory. This is nonsense to me.

A lot of BS
Germany was not Europe's most industrialized nation
The industrial production of occupied Europe was insignificant
India on the verge of rebellion in 1941? Something new
Germany was the most technologically advanced country in the world :in your dreams
There were no decisive battles in WWII
And I could continue,but it only would a waste of band-widthe

[AmonMauser]

so the Allies were turn to massacring civilians rather than fighting the German military correct?

Sounds good don't it? Whatever it took to win the war against Nazi Germany is a good.

Most of these “what ifs” turn out to be Nazi-philes indulging in fantasy in order to envision a more favorable outcome for their beloved Führer and the Nazi state rather than acknowledging reality that it went down in the most deserving and ignoble defeat.

The basic point is Nazi Germany was doomed from the very first shot because the Nazis were too blinded by their racial ideology to see the world as it really existed. The outcome of the war was a foregone conclusion. In a similiar fashion, our present day Nazi-philes are too blinded by their adulation of all things Nazi German to see what a truly doofus state that Nazi Germany really was.

Penn44

.

that's what happens when you leave a country with unpayable debts, come up with ridiculous "treaties" which humiliate the population which will later embrace a man who restores their pride and restores their place in the world, -economically and militarily.

[Penn44]

that's what happens when you leave a country with unpayable debts, come up with ridiculous "treaties" which humiliate the population which will later embrace a man who restores their pride and restores their place in the world, -economically and militarily.

We have a Bingo!

Penn44

.

[AmonMauser]

that's what happens when you leave a country with unpayable debts, come up with ridiculous "treaties" which humiliate the population which will later embrace a man who restores their pride and restores their place in the world, -economically and militarily.

We have a Bingo!

Penn44

.

It's just Bingo

[PeterOT]

that's what happens when you leave a country with unpayable debts, come up with ridiculous "treaties" which humiliate the population which will later embrace a man who restores their pride and restores their place in the world, -economically and militarily.

We have a Bingo!

Penn44

.

Nice call Penn44. In the end they always out themselves.

[cortodanzigese]

so the Allies were turn to massacring civilians rather than fighting the German military correct?

Sounds good don't it? Whatever it took to win the war against Nazi Germany is a good.

You realize that this is exactly NAZI logic? "Whatever it took to win the war is good" was Nazis' doctrine.

The basic point is Nazi Germany was doomed from the very first shot because the Nazis were too blinded by their racial ideology to see the world as it really existed. The outcome of the war was a foregone conclusion. In a similiar fashion, our present day Nazi-philes are too blinded by their adulation of all things Nazi German to see what a truly doofus state that Nazi Germany really was.

Penn44

.

Hmm, to me a truly doofus state was jewish-founded Soviet Russia which butchered 60 million of non-Jews under the cover of a communist scam.

Your political rantings, are completely off-topic howewer. Please provide some substantial, source-based arguments directly for this discussion, instead of trolling about how bad Nazi Germany was. In reality, it was bad only for Jews

A lot of BS
Germany was not Europe's most industrialized nation
The industrial production of occupied Europe was insignificant
India on the verge of rebellion in 1941? Something new
Germany was the most technologically advanced country in the world :in your dreams
There were no decisive battles in WWII
And I could continue,but it only would a waste of band-widthe

This is such pile of historical nonsense that I don't know where to even start with. What marks in modern history did you have in college? Germany WAS Europe's most industrialized state already in 1914, and second in the world to USA - that remained in 1939. Germany WAS most scientifically advanced country in the world and most Nobel winners were Germans. These are common and widely shared views among historians. I wonder what you had read on the subject since every statistics from the time period ( and most literature ) says what I merely repeated

[ljadw]

so the Allies were turn to massacring civilians rather than fighting the German military correct?

The basic point is Nazi Germany was doomed from the very first shot because the Nazis were too blinded by their racial ideology to see the world as it really existed. The outcome of the war was a foregone conclusion. In a similiar fashion, our present day Nazi-philes are too blinded by their adulation of all things Nazi German to see what a truly doofus state that Nazi Germany really was.

Penn44

.

Hmm, to me a truly doofus state was jewish-founded Soviet Russia which butchered 60 million of non-Jews under the cover of a communist scam.

But please take your political rantings with you, they're completely off-topic. Or provide some substantial, source-based arguments for this topic, instead of trolling about how bad Nazi Germany was.

A lot of BS
Germany was not Europe's most industrialized nation
The industrial production of occupied Europe was insignificant
India on the verge of rebellion in 1941? Something new
Germany was the most technologically advanced country in the world :in your dreams
There were no decisive battles in WWII
And I could continue,but it only would a waste of band-widthe

This is such pile of historical nonsense that I don't know where to even start with. What marks in modern history did you have in college? I assume the lowest possible. Germany WAS Europe's most industrialized state already in 1914, and second in the world to USA - that remained in 1939. Germany WAS most scientific advanced country in the world and most Nobel winners were Germans. These are common and widely shared views among historians. I wonder how little you had read on the subject since every statistics from the time period ( and most literature ) says what I merely repeated

Some statistics proving that Germany was the most industrialized nation in Europe and the most technologically advanced country in the world
number of cars in 1938:
Germany :one car for 45 inhabitants
France: one car for 18 inhabitants
Britain :one car for 20 inhabitants
Norway :one car for 40 inhabitants
Sweden:one car for 35 inhabitants
US :one car for 4 inhabitants
30 % of the workforce was working in the agriculture,but ,Germany had still to import a lot of food .
About the Nobel winners:(1930-1940)
physics:11,of whom 1 (ONE) German
chemistry:13 (5 germans)
medicine:14 (3 Germans)
total:38 of whom 9 (NINE) Germans,thus your statement that most Nobel winners were Germans,is wrong

[cortodanzigese]

Number of cars is an indicator of how industrialized state is? It is perhaps the indicator of how consumer-oriented society has become. The production of steel, coal, consumer goods etc. plus existing infrastructure and research centres serving the industry is what matters.

For period 1900-1940 Germany scored: 11 Noble prizes in physics, 17 in chemistry, 9 in medicine. More than any other great power of that time...

Also note, that many noble laureates from other countries, often were graduates from german universities.

German science was leading in the world, german society was best educated in the world, and most innovations of that period came from Germany ( ex.the first computer by Konrad Zuse in 1938 ) so your dislike of Germans won't change that

[Robert Rojas]

Greetings to both brother Amon Mauser and the community as a whole. Well A.M., in respect to your installment of Sunday - August 29, 2010 - 3:50am, old Uncle Bob is mystified over your apparent discomfort with the idea of TOTAL WAR as it is applied to the civilian population National Socialist Germany. If my recollection serves, the fighting men of the Fatherland's armed forces were no laggards themselves when it came to inflicting murder and mayhem upon those unfortunate souls who found themselves in the path of their advance and subsequent occupation. It might not be a terribly bad idea if you carefully reassessed your position on this matter. On an incidental note, what exactly is your current age and how many years of formal education do you possess? Your age and education might provide a bit of illumination on your weltanschaunng. Thank you in advance for entertaining my pointed inquiries. Well, that's my latest two Yankee cents worth on this festering topic of interest - for now anyway. As always, I would like to bid you a copacetic day from sea to shining sea.

Best Regards,
Uncle Bob

[ljadw]

Number of cars is an indicator of how industrialized state is? It is perhaps the indicator of how consumer-oriented society has become. The production of steel, coal, consumer goods etc. plus existing infrastructure and research centres serving the industry is what matters.

For period 1900-1940 Germany scored: 11 Noble prizes in physics, 17 in chemistry, 9 in medicine. More than any other great power of that time...

Also note, that many noble laureates from other countries, often were graduates from german universities.

German science was leading in the world, german society was best educated in the world, and most innovations of that period came from Germany ( ex.the first computer by Konrad Zuse in 1938 ) so your dislike of Germans won't change that

11 + 17 + 9 =37 for a total of 120 prizes for physics,chemistry and medicine :thus 30 % In my mathematics,30 % is not the most .
about the number of cars:it is an indication of the strength of the automobile industry,which is consuming steel,whatever,the fact is that France and Britain had more cars and that you said :the production of consumer goods is what matters and that the number of cars is an indication how consumer-oriented a society has become .
An other point,you are "forgetting" is the 30 % of the active German population working in the agriculture, IMHO,that's an indication that Germany was NOT the most industrialised country in Europe .
Btw:you should pick better exemples :the Ju 39O was no intercontinental aircraft,it never was operational .

[cortodanzigese]

German economy was strongest and biggest in interwar Europe, Germany was most industrialized european nation since 1890s. End of story.

[LWD]

Then Germany would have been defeated by the British and her commonwealth alone, as she stood no hope of defeating the British and her commonwealth

What an utter nonsense. As long as Britain was alone with Germany, it was going to lose.

I'm not at all sure that's accurate and that's without considering that Britain was not alone.

British industrial capacity was only one-third of Germany's in 1939. Germany was Europe's most industrialized nation.

Source PLS. Even if correct Britian had much more access to raw materials and the industry of the rest of the world.

Even worse by 1941 Germany had industrial and resource potential of all of Europe at her disposal.

Incorrect. And Germany didn't prove particularly efficient at using the industry of conquered areas in most cases anyway.

Germany and Italy had population of 80 mln and 45 mln versus Britain's 45 mln and some mln from dominion's (India was already on verge of rebellion in 1941 and can't be taken into account) so where's the manpower edge?

Again not correct. While there was some unrest in India it was hardly on the "verge of rebellion". Not taking it into account seems to me to be "cooking the books".

Not to mention that Germany had most advanced military research like late-war turbojet Me-262, intercontinental Ju-390, Stumgewehr 44, first ever night-combat googles, since Germany was also most technologically advanced country in the world.

Wrong yet again. The Me-262 was so unreliable it wouldn't have been fielded by the allies. How many Ju-390s were produced and how did it compare to the B-29 or if you are including experimental aircraft the B-36. As for night vision goggles, I'll quote http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-night- ... oggles.htm

The first night vision goggles were invented by the United States Army for use in World War II

And that's not even getting into things like proximity fuses, centimeter wave radar, ets.

German military doctrine, practice, cadres, training, effectivenes were lightning years ahead of British.

At the start of the war perhaps, although I think even that is a bit overstated, but by 43 that's hardly the case.

In fact Germans never lost battle with Angloamericans when odds where equal - only when latter had at least 2-1 superiority in numbers.

There's a book called When Odds Were Even that would seem to indicate otherwise. The Germans also had the numbers at Bastogne and didn't seem to come out on the winning side.

Let's assume the Soviets go to war with Japan in 1939 over Nomonhan, Hitler remains neutral and faces Britain.

Why would we want to do that?

The outcome is: Germany gradually dwarfes Britain in military production, Germany also builds many more uboots than historically ( that means three-times more losses than historically which were umm giant), Germany send three as much panzers to Afrika for Rommel who historically almost knock out tommies, Germany also has more fighters to face carpet bombers, do you realize how catastrophic this would be for the British? With SU busy in Far East Germany would wipe out their outdated empire in a matter of lightning years.
{/quote]
??? I don't see any logical basis for your supposition. Certainly it is not a deterministic outcome of your assumption which has little to do with this what if.

All decisive battles of WWII were won on the eastern front,

For some selective enough subset of battles which you call decisive. Most would disagree I suspect.

War with Soviet Union has eaten 80% of german war potential

source please.

yet Germany still was a hard-to-defeat enemy for the western allies.

Was it? Let's see D-Day was in June of 44 and by spring of 45 there are western armies in Germany proper. Doesn't sound like it to me.

sorry you just have no arguments for this theory. This is nonsense to me.

I rather think the shoe is on the other foot.