U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 6318
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by Michael Kenny » 24 Mar 2020 22:46

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
23 Mar 2020 23:51


Waves don't wash away stone.
They do where I live.
Heugh Storm Damage . . . (3).jpg
Heugh Storm Damage (56).jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 5747
Joined: 13 Jun 2008 22:54
Location: Kent

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by Terry Duncan » 24 Mar 2020 22:47

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
24 Mar 2020 22:37
DerGiLLster wrote:
24 Mar 2020 17:40
...
Also I can't find the source for it now, but is it really true during an artillery bombardment at Italian beacheads, that something like 70% of all German shells were duds and didn't go off? Can you confirm that? Because if thats true, than man, their problems run deeper than that.
Recall that from decades ago. Not sure where I read it, possibly a magazine, but can't say. I suspect its a distortion of some misquoted report or remark by the participants there. From elsewhere it does appear the German had a growing problem with quality control of ammunition. Bad primers or ignition cartridges in the propellant cases, bad propellant or explosive mixes, bad fuzes, inconsistent casting & millwork of the projectiles. This was about the time impending copper shortages cause the rotating bands to be made of Sintered Iron, which led to claimed inconsistencies in MV of departing projectiles & resulting range inconsistency. There was also a question of increase inbore detonations of projectiles.

A better documented problem was replacement of worn barrels. To reduce that use of the highest charge increment was only by authorization of the senior artillery commanders. This extended barrel life by 30 to 50 %, but reduced effective range by roughly 20%. That handed off a further tactical advantage to Allied artillery.
The best documented experience with large German shells is that of Bismarck, where pretty much every hit was examined in great detail. From memory, something like 50% or so of Bismarcks shells were duds or failed to explode properly or as designed. The 11" gunned ships seem to have performed better, but they were longer in service prior to war to iron out problems so it might be that the problem affected wartime production only?

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 5747
Joined: 13 Jun 2008 22:54
Location: Kent

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by Terry Duncan » 24 Mar 2020 22:49

Michael Kenny wrote:
24 Mar 2020 22:46
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
23 Mar 2020 23:51


Waves don't wash away stone.
They do where I live.
They are not handwaivium stone foundations. Would be a bit of a problem for tanks to cross though.

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 24 Mar 2020 22:59

Terry Duncan wrote:If you looked, someone already has posted an estimate for the task at hand;

Not engineering proposals but proposals in general...Nature Magazine in 1968 ran a competition for damming the English channel. The article can be found on the internet.

72 meters tall and 82 meters wide at the crest would require 280,000,000 cubic meters of fill.

viewtopic.php?p=2257406#p2257406
The individual who posted that is on my ignore list.

In any event, a dam is far different from a causeway with provision for tidal flow and currents - factors I specified in this thread.
They didnt need to [integrate Indian/African labor] OTL. The war was won and the Russians provided most of the manpower to win it. Also, you posit a scenario where somehow Germany finds itself able to challenge the OTL Allied production figures, so the Allies would clearly need to produce more.
The Wallies expected Russia to collapse - or considered this a very distinct possibility - until Stalingrad. So why does actual Soviet collapse in this ATL suddenly motivate a complete re-engineering of Wallied societies?

Even granting that they would (arguendo), that move comes in late '42 and would take years to scale up. You need to recruit Indians/Africans for industrial labor, train most of them to read, build housing accommodations for them, build up machine tools and other plant to increase production with them, train supervisors in Hindi and the multitude of regional languages of India and Africa.

And all that assumes there isn't a massive racist rising against the policies when millions of Indians and Africans start pouring into Detroit and Birmingham. Combined with greater Wallied losses and the prospect of millions more, nothing would be more likely to force a political end to the war.

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 5747
Joined: 13 Jun 2008 22:54
Location: Kent

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by Terry Duncan » 24 Mar 2020 23:25

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
24 Mar 2020 22:59
The individual who posted that is on my ignore list.

In any event, a dam is far different from a causeway with provision for tidal flow and currents - factors I specified in this thread.
The concept is similar, and deals with the need to prevent the sea washing over the top of the structure. It is a far more accurate figure than guessing.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
24 Mar 2020 22:59
The Wallies expected Russia to collapse - or considered this a very distinct possibility - until Stalingrad. So why does actual Soviet collapse in this ATL suddenly motivate a complete re-engineering of Wallied societies?
In this scenario the Russians have collapsed, making it rather clear to everyone that the Allies will need extra manpower to produce what is needed.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
24 Mar 2020 22:59
Even granting that they would (arguendo), that move comes in late '42 and would take years to scale up. You need to recruit Indians/Africans for industrial labor, train most of them to read, build housing accommodations for them, build up machine tools and other plant to increase production with them, train supervisors in Hindi and the multitude of regional languages of India and Africa.

Curiously enough, not every colonial citizen was an illiterate savage banging the rocks together trying to light a fire. Much of the civil service that ran the empire in India and Africa comprised of Indians who had good educations, indeed these same people were still in place when the empire retreated and often were part of the governments that took over. The other objections, such as housing, are no different to those faced by the Germans utilizing slave labour, so it is obviously possible to achieve if you desire to do so.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
24 Mar 2020 22:59
And all that assumes there isn't a massive racist rising against the policies when millions of Indians and Africans start pouring into Detroit and Birmingham. Combined with greater Wallied losses and the prospect of millions more, nothing would be more likely to force a political end to the war.
You do not need to move people into existing cities, you can do as the Russians did, and indeed as Ford did too, and just build an entirely new facility purpose built for building whatever is needed.

As to greater losses, why should the Allies suffer heavier losses? The Germans will have already lost the core of the army that invaded Russia, most of the experienced pre-war men had vanished by the time they got to Moscow, and you then propose the throw them into some strange causeway project that will be like a Verdun re-enactment in mid-English Channel.

If you apply the same rules to both sides, all both sides the same initiative levels, then the Allies are going to win easily as they have far too great an advantage.

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 24 Mar 2020 23:34

Carl Schwamberger wrote:From elsewhere it does appear the German had a growing problem with quality control of ammunition.
Later in the war, as the Wallies started bombing the German oil industry (intertwined with chemicals and therefore powder), the Germans were using saltpeter to substitute up to half the content of their shells. (USSBS Oil Industry report, IIRC)

The Germans may have had fuse problems with some of the rarely-used and presumably older super-heavy shells that they used to bombard Allied beachheads in Italy. At least it wouldn't be surprising.

A Heer-wide fuse problem would be suprising, however. The WW2 Heer killed more soldiers than an army in history. As most casualties were caused by artillery, it seems unlikely the Heer had a systemic fuse problem.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7319
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 25 Mar 2020 00:05

Terry Duncan wrote:
24 Mar 2020 22:47
... The best documented experience with large German shells is that of Bismarck, where pretty much every hit was examined in great detail. From memory, something like 50% or so of Bismarcks shells were duds or failed to explode properly or as designed. The 11" gunned ships seem to have performed better, but they were longer in service prior to war to iron out problems so it might be that the problem affected wartime production only?
Might, but the naval & army artillery ammo manufacture were separate agencies. Not a obvious argument problems in one carried over to another. Theres also the difference there of ordinary HE ammo detonating on soil, trees, buildings, vs AP ammo vs hard steel. AP ammo can be expected to not behave as consistent vs armor.

Getting back to the field artillery ammo, there is the question of what a "dud" was defined as. If poorly installed base plugs are blowing out prematurely preventing the projectile case from fragmenting then the shell might appear a dud to the casual observer. Ditto for a projectile that splits but does shatter into the 2cm fragments.

Another bit of noise in the data is the angle of impact preventing fuse function. When the angle is below 270 mil or 15 deg. point detonating fuzes won't perform consistently, & the common projectiles skip or riccochette without detonating, or detonate far beyond the original point of impact/aim point. Occasionally we found skipped rounds lying about. Often you could find the initial point of impact and a gouge along part of the new course across the ground to the final resting point. Those were useful for getting a back azimuth to the cannon that fired the round. That compass direction went into a Shell Report which was used to estimate cannon battery locations for counter fires.

DerGiLLster
Member
Posts: 51
Joined: 12 Aug 2015 00:38
Location: Chicago

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by DerGiLLster » 25 Mar 2020 00:26

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
24 Mar 2020 22:28
DerGiLLster wrote:I also love how it never occurs to you how the inefficient their bureaucracy was. Do you still believe in the fairy tale that their science was superior?
If you can find a single post in which I praise the Nazi bureaucracy overall as efficient or say they had better science overall, I'll post my private phone number so you can all leave me mean messages. In this very thread I have corrected somebody for saying German science was better overall.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=247189&p=2255994&h ... 1#p2255994
I never even accused you for praising the system. There is a difference between ignoring the idiots running the place and just praising them. You have to acknowledge how badly run their system was
Please, please, PLEASE explain how Germany can win when nukes get involved.
Upthread I've already said the Wallies win if they're resolved to drop dozens of A-bombs and accept the German response.
Oh okay, so you admit Germany can't win. Well we are getting somewhere.
Canaris, being of the intelligence, and Goering of the air force. Having semi competent leaders replace them would be a big improvement.
I have an ATL in which one of the mods is Goering and Canaris not being incompetent morons. viewtopic.php?f=11&t=242003&start=15#p2203237 (Also Raeder and Halder are not incompetent)
You CANNOT make them competent. Unless you change their personalities. Which is the same as including time travel in these ATLs. How about just killing Goering and Canaris? Replace Wever for the air force and Heydrich for the intelligence. Both organizations get BIG boosts in competent leaders and as a result will see more competent officers appointed.
Your response exhibits exactly the kind of AHF consensus that one has to reject: that anyone arguing the Axis had a chance for at least a favorable peace agreement (and actually only Germany IMO) is a Nazi-worshipping idiot who hasn't read anything about WW2. It's a facile consensus reinforced by cross-talk among its holders on this site and by a few actual Wehraboos whom the consensus sees as representative of all who contravene the consensus. If you can get beyond that view, maybe we can have a productive discussion.
Chill bro. I used to be in the same boat as you. I used to eat up the general memoirs like they were fact or something. And you know what? I started to look up the economics, industry and resources of the US. And I was amazed. Pushing women to build their planes. Having scientific departments devoted to build and test their equipment. Alongside having a more standardized system of logistics.

Maybe you won't get it now, but as you get older and the more you read about, the less faith there is in Germany winning.

Here is a start:

https://history.army.mil/html/bookshelv ... saww2.html

Also, your personality exhibits traits of smug narcissism. You block those you poke holes in your arguments so you decide to block them.

Guess what? Blocking them doesn't make you a good debater. It genuinely reeks of insecurity that you can't take criticism. Even those that do insult you. Well who cares? Toughen up and take some punches. Because its not about those who debate with you. Its the third party spectators who look at your posts and see what you have to offer. There are so many posters who I believe are genuine idiots, yet I don't block them because sometimes they have worthwhile something to say, or are good practice for just debating points I know. Always good to re affirm what you said.

You wanna have an honest, open debate? Unblock those debaters and quit being a big pussy. We are NOT here to bully you. We are here to debate with you. Why don't you try reading the sources your opponents cite and see where did they get bibliography from? It helps me when I learn to know what sources are trustworthy and whats fallacious.

You're missing out on what mistakes the Germans, and even the Soviets and WAllies have blocking posters.

If you want a scenario where Germany wins World War Two, have these two scenarios:

1.) Churchill dies or doesn't become elected, instead being Halifax as prime minister.

2.) Hitler dies of a drug overdose after the Battle of France.

In the expected result. Halifax wishes to grab peace, and Goering agrees so, because Goering was more of a diplomatic type. See the Munich agreement on how he helped Hitler. Goering also doesn't want to invade the Soviet Union, and wishes to return to colonial times, having parts of French Africa absorbed into the German Reich. Germany then goes back to the civilian economy, because Goering in OTL wished to do so.

That's one scenario where Germany could have won.

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 2081
Joined: 02 Feb 2006 00:23
Location: Arizona

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by T. A. Gardner » 25 Mar 2020 00:55

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
24 Mar 2020 00:07
Any analysis to back that up?

And the problem for the Germans - as with the Allies - is capturing a port and getting it into action before you're pushed into the sea for lack of supplies.
The problem for the Germans isn't capturing a port nearly as much as their inability to clear one that has undergone demolition and has block ships sunk in it.

As for the analysis... This is rough but works...

Let's say the causeway has a two lane road on top of compacted gravel and is 25 miles long. Trucks have to leave the depot at one end and arrive at a depot at the other some distance from the causeway. Let's use a one-way trip of 50 miles and the truck does 25 mph average for the trip spaced about 50 yards / 150 feet from the next truck. That's about 1700 trucks spaced evenly between the depots. The trip per truck takes about 2 hours to make. Then there's loading and unloading at each end. Let's add an hour each end for that.
So, any single truck makes one trip per 4 hours or a maximum of 6 per day with everything being perfect.

But, it's obvious that the system won't work flawlessly. There will be breakdowns, accidents, mistakes, inefficiency, and maintenance involved so let's say the whole thing runs at 50% efficiency overall. That is about 800 to 900 trucks in the 'pipeline' going to England and a similar number returning. They make 3 or 4 trips a day-- let's say 4. Each is loaded with an average of 1 ton of supplies by weight (many items will be lighter or heavier so the volume will vary considerably and the trucks aren't loaded to maximum efficiency).

That gives 3600 tons of supply per day as a rough average. This could vary depending on enemy activity and weather among other variables. The result is that the German forces in England have enough supplies for offensive action of about 12 divisions. If you start counting in having the Luftwaffe having bases, and that there are other functions involved-- like feeding the civilian population in the captured area to at least some extent-- the Germans might have 6 to 8 divisions capable of offensive action in England supported, probably less.

Compare that to a single 10,000 GRT freighter bringing in double to 2.5 times that amount of cargo to a port and it being hauled off.

If you instead, put a rail line across the causeway, the railroad would easily supply the needs, but now you have the issue of it being extremely vulnerable to attack. The Allies break the rail line, it gets repaired. The Allies break the rail line... ad infinitum. The problem here is that the railroad would be a highly vulnerable target that would be difficult to protect.

Thus, ports and ships are the most efficient and safest way to move supplies to England, just as they historically were anywhere you had access to the sea at the time.

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 25 Mar 2020 01:16

Der GiLLster wrote:Toughen up and take some punches
Consider that literally nobody agrees with me on this site, yet I continue to post my ideas and argue with folks...

No, I block people as a matter of time management and hygiene. There is a group of posters who all say the same thing - Allied resources etc. - and rarely does anyone point out that I've missed something that a blocked person said, that wasn't already posted 100 times by one of the consensus-holders. If you've spent any time on Twitter, for example, you'll appreciate the virtue of blocking certain voices.
quit being a big pussy
ok
You CANNOT make them competent. Unless you change their personalities. Which is the same as including time travel in these ATLs. How about just killing Goering and Canaris?
That's kind of the point, minus the blood. You replace Goering and Canaris with different people also named Goering and Canaris in this example. The individual foibles of high leaders are the contingent windows into alternate histories.
I used to be in the same boat as you. I used to eat up the general memoirs like they were fact or something. And you know what? I started to look up the economics, industry and resources of the US. And I was amazed. Pushing women to build their planes. Having scientific departments devoted to build and test their equipment. Alongside having a more standardized system of logistics.

Maybe you won't get it now, but as you get older and the more you read about, the less faith there is in Germany winning.
Imagine someone on the internet conveyed to someone else an entirely wrong impression of their background and intellectual character. In this hypo, you happen to know the exact character of the person impugned and know the impression conveyed is entirely wrong (he's your IRL friend, say). What would you recommend your friend do? Explain to the other person that he actually possesses such and such background that the impression conveyed is incorrect? Or would you and your friend know that this kind of statement on an internet forum is completely useless and the impugning poster has a background of assumptions/beliefs that you'd have to work against before any of that was useful? IMO obviously the latter.

...which is the tack I'll take with you. I invite you engage in a rational, civil dialogue about substantive points but if not I'll have no qualms about ignoring you.
If you want a scenario where Germany wins World War Two, have these two scenarios:
Great, thanks.

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 25 Mar 2020 01:54

T.A. Gardner wrote:As for the analysis... This is rough but works...
Thanks for putting some elbow grease in.

I could quibble with this or that part of your analysis, but I don't share its premise of a two-land roadway or a single rail line. Obviously that's unworkable. As I've said throughout the thread, the causeway surface is at least 100ft wide.

What do you think the total material volume would be? Upthread my first rough take was 5.3bn ft3. That's probably too low, however.

I'll concede that you and others have made useful points about wave action in the channel that would require the surface of the causeway to be a bit higher.

Nonetheless, 15bn ft3 of material is economically feasible IMO, for the reasons I outlined above. Most of the work is filling in the deep sections of the channel and that work can be done by relatively cheap concrete barges whose construction would cost less than OTL investments in fortifications rendered unnecessary in this ATL.

DerGiLLster
Member
Posts: 51
Joined: 12 Aug 2015 00:38
Location: Chicago

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by DerGiLLster » 25 Mar 2020 02:14

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
25 Mar 2020 01:16
Der GiLLster wrote:Toughen up and take some punches
Consider that literally nobody agrees with me on this site, yet I continue to post my ideas and argue with folks...

No, I block people as a matter of time management and hygiene. There is a group of posters who all say the same thing - Allied resources etc. - and rarely does anyone point out that I've missed something that a blocked person said, that wasn't already posted 100 times by one of the consensus-holders. If you've spent any time on Twitter, for example, you'll appreciate the virtue of blocking certain voices.
This isn't twitter. You're already far off.
You CANNOT make them competent. Unless you change their personalities. Which is the same as including time travel in these ATLs. How about just killing Goering and Canaris?
That's kind of the point, minus the blood. You replace Goering and Canaris with different people also named Goering and Canaris in this example. The individual foibles of high leaders are the contingent windows into alternate histories.
Wow, this is where you are clearly wrong. If you actually looked into the history of both these figures, you would find out that they are far from competent.

Here are two sources to help you about Wever:

http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/tag/general-walther-wever
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walther_Wever_(general)

From the first source:
Wever displayed an above average intelligence, valor and superior organization skills. These traits propelled him to the rank of captain and eventually to a post in the staff of the famous German military commander, General Erich Ludendorff.
Wever knew how to operate logistics and how to gain the trust of his friends. Goering was arrogant, and later after the Putsch, became a drug addict. Even without his addiction, he had a habit for throwing away officer reports and bashing anyone who talked down to him. A competent leader is willing to take criticism in order to learn. Goering wasn't one of them.

Heydrich, was a fanatical Nazi, unlike Canaris, who purposedly would steer Germany from getting anything done. His intelliegence service was ineffective and whatever info they could carry was faulty and not of much use. This was because of lack of enthusiasm for the Nazi regime

Compare that with Heydrich, who ran the Sicherheitsdienst, where it was effective at ridding of political dissent and anyone who dared go against the Nazi opinion. The Abwehr, never got close to getting of such magnitude done. He also went into great detail drawing up the extermination camps, going down to such pedantic detail to make sure it was right. Unlike Canaris, Heydrich served Hitler well, even leading Hitler to call him, "the man with the iron heart", not only for his ability to get things done, but for his brutality as well. Anyone can be brutal, but being brutal and competent are fortunately rare traits in this world.

Calling Wever and Heydrich, another "Goering and Canaris" is beyond wrong. It shows that you don't even understand the subject of World War Two to begin with.

So provide sources showing how Wever and Heydrich, were "incompetent" like Goering and Canaris. Because that view is absolutely not carrect.

I used to be in the same boat as you. I used to eat up the general memoirs like they were fact or something. And you know what? I started to look up the economics, industry and resources of the US. And I was amazed. Pushing women to build their planes. Having scientific departments devoted to build and test their equipment. Alongside having a more standardized system of logistics.

Maybe you won't get it now, but as you get older and the more you read about, the less faith there is in Germany winning.
Imagine someone on the internet conveyed to someone else an entirely wrong impression of their background and intellectual character. In this hypo, you happen to know the exact character of the person impugned and know the impression conveyed is entirely wrong (he's your IRL friend, say). What would you recommend your friend do? Explain to the other person that he actually possesses such and such background that the impression conveyed is incorrect? Or would you and your friend know that this kind of statement on an internet forum is completely useless and the impugning poster has a background of assumptions/beliefs that you'd have to work against before any of that was useful? IMO obviously the latter.

...which is the tack I'll take with you. I invite you engage in a rational, civil dialogue about substantive points but if not I'll have no qualms about ignoring you.
Imagine completely missing the point, its not about me trying to be just like you. Its this head in the sand belief that Germany could do anything, without paying attention to its culture. Thats why I mention bureaucracy, you have to look into their bureaucracy to understand why they lost the war. And its a mess. Its a simple making of the bed. And no stop accusing people who try to explain you of bureaucracy, of being rude. They are not, its just a broken system, it was such a mess. The only reason why they got so far was moreso allied incompetence than what the Germans pushed. Thats why the Battle of France folded in just six weeks. Because the French didn't adopt. If they tried to adapt modern tactics around 1937-38, then Germany would have beaten to the ground, considering the French of 1940 had superior tanks and equipment, but unfortunately no tanks.

Also quit with the big words. It genuinely sounds like you're trying to prove yourself as a better debater. Yes, I know what you mean, but just get to the point. Show some damn sources. Don't list a book that is 500 pages long and expect us to find where it is you sourced. Include the damn page.

And no, its not about your maps. Its about showing what the Allies had at hand. Its nice to show what the Germans had in stock for materials. But do the same for the US and UK, to see if your point stacks up.

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 25 Mar 2020 02:21

Der GiLLster wrote:If you actually looked into the history of both these figures, you would find out that they are far from competent.
Dude I said Goering and Canaris were INcompetent. Come on.
Calling Wever and Heydrich, another "Goering and Canaris" is beyond wrong
No idea where you're getting this. I'm not replacing G and C with W and H, I'm replacing them with unspecified competent people who, for the purposes of convenience in ATL narrative, are also called Goering and Canaris.

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 25 Mar 2020 02:24

Also quit with the big words. It genuinely sounds like you're trying to prove yourself as a better debater.
I'll use whichever words come easiest, regardless of how that makes me look.

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: U.S./UK forced to implement something like the Victory Plan of 1941

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 25 Mar 2020 02:55

Terry Duncan wrote:Curiously enough, not every colonial citizen was an illiterate savage banging the rocks together trying to light a fire.
I don't know what this is supposed to mean. To say that Indians and Africans had low literacy and education is an indictment of the British, not of their subjects. It was the British Empire that, in its immense benevolence and assumption of the White Man's Burden, deindustrialized India and sought its reliance on the colonizer.
The other objections, such as housing, are no different to those faced by the Germans utilizing slave labour, so it is obviously possible to achieve if you desire to do so.
Hope you're aware that the Germans used horrific camps to house much of the foreign labor force.
The problem for the Wallies is that they're too racist to import millions of brown/black people for their labor, but not racist enough to use the Nazi solution of treating them like expendable garbage.

Return to “What if”