Napalm the bocage! - Page 13




 
--
 
December 22nd, 2011  
Der Alte
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
Hallo Opa, waren Sie am Ostfront?
Nein, nur im Westen.
December 22nd, 2011  
BritinBritain
 
 
I seem to remember something about the German POW's in the British zone keeping their command structure. Stalin was convinced that the Western allies were going to arm the German Army and attack the Soviets..
December 22nd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
I never understood why after attacking Poland (the casus belli for the allies), Finland, Romania, Lithuania, etc, financing Hitler in 1939, 40 and half of 41, Churchill & Roosevelt ran to Stalin's help as soon as the USSR was invaded. They should have left the two gigantic tyrants bleed each other for years.

I also think that had the US given priority to the Pacific and fought on only one front (like Stalin always did), it could have defeated Japan by early 1943 (not demanding unconditional surrender but asking Japan to join the fight against the USSR) and used 10 million Indian, Chinese & Japanese troops to invade the USSR through Iran, rapidly capturing its oilfields and then the Romanian oilfields. By 1944 both German and Soviet troops and economies would have been exhausted and the troops surrendered by the million to the Anglo armies that would treat them fairly, causing Stalin & Hitler to collapse.
--
December 22nd, 2011  
Yossarian
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
I never understood why after attacking Poland (the casus belli for the allies), Finland, Romania, Lithuania, etc, financing Hitler in 1939, 40 and half of 41, Churchill & Roosevelt ran to Stalin's help as soon as the USSR was invaded. They should have left the two gigantic tyrants bleed each other for years.

I also think that had the US given priority to the Pacific and fought on only one front (like Stalin always did), it could have defeated Japan by early 1943 (not demanding unconditional surrender but asking Japan to join the fight against the USSR) and used 10 million Indian, Chinese & Japanese troops to invade the USSR through Iran, rapidly capturing its oilfields and then the Romanian oilfields. By 1944 both German and Soviet troops and economies would have been exhausted and the troops surrendered by the million to the Anglo armies that would treat them fairly, causing Stalin & Hitler to collapse.
At the time the proirity was given to defeating Germany because it was widely felt that Germany posed the biggest threat.

As for the American support to the USSR, if the USSR was either defeated or knocked out of the war, then that meant Hitler could then focus his enitre efforts then on fighting the western allies.

For that time being, as illustrated the Western allies needed a Soviet front to apply Pressure to help end the war as quickly as possible.

As for Japan surrending and helping the U.S. without unconditional surrender... I don't think that would have been very likely.
December 22nd, 2011  
LeEnfield
 
 
By helping the USSR during WW2 you are not only helping them you are helping yourself
December 22nd, 2011  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte
Yes, some have to portray the bad guys so the good guys can be heroes.

Many of the old WWII veterans were furious when the movie Inglorious Bastards premiered in Germany.
I can understand that as the movie was idiocy of the highest level, many Royal Navy veterans were not happy about the movie U571 either.
December 22nd, 2011  
samneanderthal
 
My point is that on June 22 Germany with 80 million people at war with Britain, India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and the USSR (over 500 million people) and with limited natural resources (oil, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, tin, rubber, etc,) was a much smaller threat than the USSR.
It made sense to help Finland with 4 million people and no armament, but helping an aggressor that started the war with 28,000 tanks and 21,000 planes, 170 million people, huge resources and an almost endless territory to conquer in lousy weather and with an incredibly bad road system, makes little sense. If Churchill and Roosevelt thought that the USSR was going to collapse despite its huge resources, a little help would not make any difference, it would probably be wasted anyway.
Even if the Germans had taken Moscow and Leningrad in 1941, as long as the Japs didn't attack the USSR, the Soviets could have continued to withdraw, extending the German supply lines and leaving more partisans behind their lines to disrupt their supplies. The idea that Stalin merited or could even use efficiently any help (he made better equipment than the British tanks and Hurricanes he received in 1941 and 42, by the time he started receiving a lot of help from the US he had already won the war) is absurd. The Germans simply could not defeat the USSR but only continue expanding the occupied territory, requiring ever more men to control it.
By the time of an Anglo-Asian invasion through Iran the German army would have been over extended and very vulnerable and a Soviet army without American trucks, fuel, planes, explosives, steel, boots, food, trains, etc, would have been very weak. And the US being able to use all its pilots, troops, etc, and with a powerful RAF would have been able to finish off the Soviet and German airforces and then their armies.
The fact that the Angloes controlled most of the food supply (including South America, etc,) would have been decisive, since without food neither the German nor Soviet armies could have fought for a long time. Like Napoleon said, an army moves on its belly. There were 500 million Chinese and 378 million Indians (as well as Filipinos, Indonesians, etc,) in near starvation conditions, so it would not have been difficult to raise and train a powerful army with these people.
As for Japan attacking the USSR, that was the original Imperial army's plan (conditiond on Moscow falling to the Germans), which was scrapped only because Roosevelt embargoed oil and scrap iron because the Japs occupied French Indochina. Japan facing the US alone would have soon realized that the only possible way to save face and survive would be to comply with the Americans and perhaps even gain some territory from the USSR in doing so.
December 22nd, 2011  
lljadw
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samneanderthal
My point is that on June 22 Germany with 80 million people at war with Britain, India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and the USSR (over 500 million people) and with limited natural resources (oil, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, tin, rubber, etc,) was a much smaller threat than the USSR.
It made sense to help Finland with 4 million people and no armament, but helping an aggressor that started the war with 28,000 tanks and 21,000 planes, 170 million people, huge resources and an almost endless territory to conquer in lousy weather and with an incredibly bad road system, makes little sense. If Churchill and Roosevelt thought that the USSR was going to collapse despite its huge resources, a little help would not make any difference, it would probably be wasted anyway.
Even if the Germans had taken Moscow and Leningrad in 1941, as long as the Japs didn't attack the USSR, the Soviets could have continued to withdraw, extending the German supply lines and leaving more partisans behind their lines to disrupt their supplies. The idea that Stalin merited or could even use efficiently any help (he made better equipment than the British tanks and Hurricanes he received in 1941 and 42, by the time he started receiving a lot of help from the US he had already won the war) is absurd. The Germans simply could not defeat the USSR but only continue expanding the occupied territory, requiring ever more men to control it.
By the time of an Anglo-Asian invasion through Iran the German army would have been over extended and very vulnerable and a Soviet army without American trucks, fuel, planes, explosives, steel, boots, food, trains, etc, would have been very weak. And the US being able to use all its pilots, troops, etc, and with a powerful RAF would have been able to finish off the Soviet and German airforces and then their armies.
The fact that the Angloes controlled most of the food supply (including South America, etc,) would have been decisive, since without food neither the German nor Soviet armies could have fought for a long time. Like Napoleon said, an army moves on its belly. There were 500 million Chinese and 378 million Indians (as well as Filipinos, Indonesians, etc,) in near starvation conditions, so it would not have been difficult to raise and train a powerful army with these people.
As for Japan attacking the USSR, that was the original Imperial army's plan (conditiond on Moscow falling to the Germans), which was scrapped only because Roosevelt embargoed oil and scrap iron because the Japs occupied French Indochina. Japan facing the US alone would have soon realized that the only possible way to save face and survive would be to comply with the Americans and perhaps even gain some territory from the USSR in doing so.
As usual,Sam is making a fool of himself .
He writes :"a little help (from the West) would not make any difference.
:"by the time he received a lot of help from the US,he had already won the war"
AND :"without American trucks,boots(always the myth of the boots),the Russian army would be very weak .
December 22nd, 2011  
lljadw
 
Returning to the OP,an interesting source(but,warning,it is not about US boots) is :
Bushing the Bocage:American Combined Arms Operations in France :6 june-31 july 1944.
December 22nd, 2011  
LeEnfield
 
 
By the end of WW2 I think that all the Allied troops thought that was that and they were going to go home, to start another war with one of your allies would have caused a hell of trouble for any one that started it. Now my father was called up in 1938 and I did not see him till early 1947. So he had been away for 9 years and if we went to war with Russia how many more years would that have added to his call up.
Also by then every one was exhausted from hard work in the factories and wanted some thing better than a few more years of the same.
 


Similar Topics
WW2 Trivia
Air Force Cadence
Pentagon confirms using white phosphorous in Iraq
US 'uses incendiary arms' in Iraq