Three World War II questions

[oldrooster]

We all have an idea of the kinds of obstacles the Germans used on their beaches. What were the Japanese going to use to stop the Americans? All I know is that they were preparing to fight us with wooden pikes.

The only thing that Japan had left at that time was people, they thought with the kamakaze attacks and suicide attacks on the ground, the Allies would tire of the was and go home, at least sparing the home islands

 

[Agrippa]

No that is not true, Stalin was counting on a long period of peace with Germany to build up the Red army after the purges of the '30s. He did everything he could to avoid war with Germany.

But by '43 at the latest, Stalin would have initiated a war with Germany.

 

[Roman Soldier]

What did Germany do with the French weapons and tanks once France was captured? Did they use these weapons as they were, or did they melt them down and use the metal for German weapons?

The same question can be asked of the American and British armies as they pushed through France and into Germany.

What was done with captured tanks and weapons?

 

[Agrippa]

What did Germany do with the French weapons and tanks once France was captured? Did they use these weapons as they were, or did they melt them down and use the metal for German weapons?

The same question can be asked of the American and British armies as they pushed through France and into Germany.

What was done with captured tanks and weapons?

Some captured equipment was utilized. For example, the British in the Western Desert used Italian tanks for a while and sent a lot of Italian equipment to the Greeks. The Germans later used some British tanks. But all these examples are the result of the British and Germans both being at the end of a very long supply line.

 

[oldrooster]

We destroyed most, sent some stuff back to the US for study. We sent all of the rocket stuff, jet aircraft, and the like back to the US. You had to be careful about using captured stuff for fear of being shot by your own troops.

 

[oldrooster]

But by '43 at the latest, Stalin would have initiated a war with Germany.

Stalin had helped the Germans since 1926 rearm, they used the USSR for a testing ground. I really dont think that Stalin would have attacked Germany.

 

[Ceris]

No clue. Racist ideology is seldom logical though.

One instance: Hitler. He was most definately non Aryan (no blond hair/blue eyes there).

 

[NiemandheißtBoshaftigkeit]

1. Why weren't all of the obstacles on Omaha beach (barrackades, bunkers) destoyed by bombs dropped from the air? Did the Allies try to destroy these and simply fail?{/QUOTE]

I am unsure of that specific beach but I know that the beach defenses were bombed and shelled. Also, the paratroops were dropped in the rear area of the defenses to attempt to eliminate artillery and capture key cities.

2. I've heard the reason that France fell to the Germans was because they lost so many resources (ie people) during WWI that they weren't able to replenish their armed forces by 1940. In other words, so many men and women were killed between 1914-1918 in France that they weren't able to produce enough people in the next generation to fight against Germany. Is this true? If it is, then wouldn't Germany have had the same problem?

lol, Germany lost just as much as France if not more. The reason France fell is becaus they suck at warfare. They devoted all of their defensive efforts to a wall I forgot the name of that barely stalled the Germans.

3. The United States firebombed dozens of Japanese cities, killing thousands. After hearing about these firebombings it is suprising that anyone in Japan was able to survive them. How is it that there are so many people in Japan today when so many were killed during the war?

Remember that Japan is only barely larger than Cali.

4. The Nazi concept of an "Aryan" is a non-Jewish person who has Nordic features. There are four features to Nordic people (according to the dictionary).

A) Blond hair
B) Blue eye
C) Enlongated Head
D) Tall

Would the Nazis have eventually gone after people who were blond/blue-eyed but short and without enlongated heads?

hypotetical questions are difficult to answer. My guess is yes....wonder if I would be 'Aryan'....blonde hair...blue eyes....6'2''.....is my head enlongated?....why would I want a long head?....

 

[Roman Soldier]

I've been reading about Operation Market Garden. Many claim that Germany would have fallen by December 1944, Berlin would have been captured by the Americans, and East Germany would not have existed during the Cold War had it been successful. Would it be realistic to think that is true?

 

[Agrippa]

I've been reading about Operation Market Garden. Many claim that Germany would have fallen by December 1944, Berlin would have been captured by the Americans, and East Germany would not have existed during the Cold War had it been successful. Would it be realistic to think that is true?

I don't think the Allies would have had the fuel reserves to get all the way to Berlin. A successful Market Garden or similar style thrust in the south may have allowed the Allies to cross the Rhine, but not much farther. The German reserves used to launch the Battle of the Bulge probably could have been used to stabilize the line if the Allies crossed the Rhine. The Western Allies may have gotten farther into Germany, but I think they would have allowed the Soviets to take Berlin (Stalin strongly insisted that the Soviets be the one to take the city) and the same occupation zones would have resulted.

 

[Roman Soldier]

I don't think the Allies would have had the fuel reserves to get all the way to Berlin. A successful Market Garden or similar style thrust in the south may have allowed the Allies to cross the Rhine, but not much farther. The German reserves used to launch the Battle of the Bulge probably could have been used to stabilize the line if the Allies crossed the Rhine. The Western Allies may have gotten farther into Germany, but I think they would have allowed the Soviets to take Berlin (Stalin strongly insisted that the Soviets be the one to take the city) and the same occupation zones would have resulted.

Hum...what makes capturing one city more important than another one? All of the cities in Germany were bombed to rubble. Why was controlling Berlin so important to Stalin, but not Munich or Bonn or Hannover?

 

[Roman Soldier]

Was the Soviet-Nazi non-agression pact known to the rest of the world? Wasn't it a dead give-away that the two nations were going to invade Poland?

 

[Agrippa]

Hum...what makes capturing one city more important than another one? All of the cities in Germany were bombed to rubble. Why was controlling Berlin so important to Stalin, but not Munich or Bonn or Hannover?

It was mostly psychological. Berlin was the head of the nation that had thoroughly ravaged the Soviet Union and it was the obvious place to get revenge.

Was the Soviet-Nazi non-agression pact known to the rest of the world? Wasn't it a dead give-away that the two nations were going to invade Poland?

Part of the pact was released, specifically the non-aggression part. The terms that said the USSR would take eastern Poland were secret until the Soviet invasion (Sept 17th IIRC).

 

[oldrooster]

The pact was a secret till after the war, by the time the USSR invaded, Poland was defeated anyway.

 

[oldrooster]

Hum...what makes capturing one city more important than another one? All of the cities in Germany were bombed to rubble. Why was controlling Berlin so important to Stalin, but not Munich or Bonn or Hannover?

Berlin was capital of Germany, when it was captured the war technically would be over. He also wanted to take Hitler alive in the worst way.

 

[Polycarp1]

Re Question #2: The answers given already are pretty accurate -- France expected a recurrence of the WWI trench warfare, and was not about to allow it to occur on French soil again. However, there are two other factors not taken into account:

The Supreme Commander of French troops, Gamelin, was totally incompetent, having gotten the job for political reasons. He was insistent that armored formations were useless, and that the function of tanks was to support the infantry, and also that aircraft would not play a significant role in the war, and should again only be used in support of infantry. And he effectively removed any reserve from his forces, by sending them into Belgium when it was attacked, so that there was nothing to counter the Ardennes breakthrough when it happened.

Also, the nine months of "phony war" and German propaganda had nearly totally destroyed French army morale. Defeatism and a lack of motivation were prevalent.

 

[Roman Soldier]

Both sides had chemical weapons during the war, but neither side dared to use them. Germany used them against those in their concentration camps, but not in battle.

Was there anything besides a MAD-like principle that kept chemical weapons from being used, especially as Germany was nearing defeat? How close did the powers come to using chemical weapons?

What kept the Germans from loading some nerve gas onto the V-2s? The Reich was almost done, so there doesn't seem to have been a reason for them not to try.

 

[oldrooster]

Germany had toyed with the idea of using gas, but cooler heads prevaled, especally 44-45, when generals started looking to the post war era. Zyklon-b was a rodent controller, not a gas that could be released into the air with any effect.

 

[Roman Soldier]

Germany had toyed with the idea of using gas, but cooler heads prevaled, especally 44-45, when generals started looking to the post war era. Zyklon-b was a rodent controller, not a gas that could be released into the air with any effect.

Certainly they had gases which could have caused an effect.

 

[oldrooster]

They did, but like executing allied fliers, cooler heads prevailed. Probably because Hitler was gassed during WW1. Just my guess though.