WWII Question

TScott

Curmudgeon
Apr 19, 2002
3,353
161
76
Arizona
Visit site
✟11,974.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Democrat
Roman Soldier said:
Yes, they did lose a lot of people. I am not denying that, but it is distortion of the facts to say that the Russians did everything and the USA/GB did nothing.
Agreed. Without the help of the USA the Germans would have defeated Europe.

I also feel that had it not been for Hitler, had Germany been led by an average bureaucrat, if the war had been left to the German generals, that they would have won.
 
Upvote 0

alexgb00

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2002
649
26
38
Klamath Falls, OR United States
✟1,218.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Roman Soldier,

I agree with you in most of your points. At the start of the war, the Soviet military didn't understand how to fight a modern war. The Germans were so successful against every single opponent because of their new kind of tactics which the world had never seen before.

It's also true that the Soviet soldiers were in general poorly equipped. I know that some parts of the army had a serious shortage of weapons and ammunition, like you say. The smaller, more important outfits, like all of the naval infantry (marines) were supplied with state-of-the-art weapons, along with years of training, and successfully conducted important operations throughout the war. But one has to be forgiving of their government, as it had gone through a revolution twenty years before, and more recently a long and painful civil war.

You're absolutely right about the purges. I'm not saying this in a patronizing way, but it's impressive to hear you say this, because it is not generally common knowledge. Stalin got rid of many incredible minds, including most military officers whose leadership would have aided greatly in the war. I agree with most historians on the assessment that Stalin had a major problem with paranoia, and would kill anyone around him who could be of any threat to him.

But here is where i see things somewhat differently. Blitzkrieg: "lightning" war. Remember what the period of the war immediately after the extraction from Dunkirk was called? "Sitzkrieg." That's what they called the lull during which there was no fighting between England and Germany, sworn enemies. There was, of course the Battle of Britain, but the English Channel didn't allow for any direct fighting on the ground. The USSR had no place to retreat or hide from the German onslaught the way that England did. If the Soviets had had a way to avoid the war, i'm sure they would have used it, but it was forced onto them. And despite all of the hardships, it was still the Soviet flag that waved over the nazi capital. This chapter in history seems like a huge Cinderella story of sorts, and it is very close to me. I don't expect anybody to feel the way that i do, of course, but it's nice to see someone with whom i mostly agree. I really appreciate your thoughtful words, R.S. Thank you for posting.
 
Upvote 0

alexgb00

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2002
649
26
38
Klamath Falls, OR United States
✟1,218.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Gentlemen, i have a small amendment. The Soviets did in fact invest in a good-sized navy and air force. There was considerable naval warfare between German and Soviet fleet in the Baltic, North, and Black seas, but probably smaller in scale than what the Americans and Japanese dealt each other in the Pacific. The Soviet air forces, which were anything but small, worked in conjunction with the ground forces.
 
Upvote 0

VioletAngel

God bless!
Feb 5, 2005
6,320
362
California
✟15,809.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Injured Soldier said:
Give the Japanese leadership some credit. They knew they couldn't take over the world. Their motivations were not all that different from every other empire or powerful nation that has ever existed - i.e. security, access to resources, economic benefit, restoration of jilted pride, acquiring to territory. Motivations that the US is certainly not alien to either. Yes, their methods were brutal, but that doesn't mean they had a plot to rule the world.

I disagree, they worshipped the Emperor as a god. They had aspirations to rule the world, whether or not that was realistic. Look up the meaning of the symbol of the sun on their flag. You could argue that point endlessly....and guess what, I'm sure the generals and admirals knew better...but the common people did not.
 
Upvote 0

alexgb00

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2002
649
26
38
Klamath Falls, OR United States
✟1,218.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Roman Soldier said:
... it is distortion of the facts to say that the Russians did everything and the USA/GB did nothing.

I'm sorry if i implied that this was the case. All of the allies participated in their own theaters of war to eliminate the enemy, but Germany was the heart of the war, and the hardest opposition Germany faced came from the Soviet Union. Unless i am forgetting something, the allies (excluding the USSR) left the mainland of Europe in early 1940 in the form of the Dunkirk evacuation, and only returned in the summer of 1943 when they landed in Italy and Southern France. The Soviets were left holding the proverbial bag in the most critical time for them, and the only help they received at this time was in the form of supplies, like Grey Eminence said above, when they really needed someone to take part of the pressure off of them in the form of a second front.
 
Upvote 0

Grey Eminence

Regular Member
Dec 8, 2004
666
14
43
✟874.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
CA-NDP
alexgb00 said:
Gentlemen, i have a small amendment. The Soviets did in fact invest in a good-sized navy and air force. There was considerable naval warfare between German and Soviet fleet in the Baltic, North, and Black seas, but probably smaller in scale than what the Americans and Japanese dealt each other in the Pacific. The Soviet air forces, which were anything but small, worked in conjunction with the ground forces.

At the outset of the war the Soviet fleet consisted of 4 battleships, 10 cruisers, 59 destroyers and 218 submarines. This did not change significantly over the course of the war. This qualifys as a modest fleet at best, although at the onset of the war the USSR did have the largest sub fleet. At the end of the war the Soviet fleet was 4th largest in the world but much of that size was due to submarines.
 
Upvote 0

alexgb00

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2002
649
26
38
Klamath Falls, OR United States
✟1,218.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
It's peculiar how American and Russian armed forces were traditionally categorized. America, separated from most of the world by two oceans, has a very big navy, and the American marines comprise an entire branch of the service. Russians have historically had to use their ground forces, and in the Soviet times had many airborne divisions (they were significantly cut after the disintegration of the USSR), while their navy is smaller, and their naval infantry are select sailors from ships.
 
Upvote 0

Street Smarts

Well-Known Member
Oct 7, 2004
865
43
✟1,236.00
Faith
Christian
Politics
US-Republican
alexgb00 said:
I'm sorry if i implied that this was the case. All of the allies participated in their own theaters of war to eliminate the enemy, but Germany was the heart of the war, and the hardest opposition Germany faced came from the Soviet Union. Unless i am forgetting something, the allies (excluding the USSR) left the mainland of Europe in early 1940 in the form of the Dunkirk evacuation, and only returned in the summer of 1943 when they landed in Italy and Southern France. The Soviets were left holding the proverbial bag in the most critical time for them, and the only help they received at this time was in the form of supplies, like Grey Eminence said above, when they really needed someone to take part of the pressure off of them in the form of a second front.

The Soviets made a treaty with Hitler to keep him at bay while he wasted the rest of mainland Europe, so dont blame the rest of Europe for that. The Soviets would have stayed away if it wasnt for Hitler attacking them.

Oh and as Roman Solider said eariler yes they should thank God for winter when the Germans got to Moscow. Because the Soviets were trained better to handle the conditions of their homeland.
Hey I admire someone who has strong loyalty to their country, but you should THANK the US because without us Europe including Russia would have been the continent of Germany.

Roman Solider brings up a great point of the number of theaters that the Americans had to fight in. Sorry that the Russians lost 20 million soldiers in their 1 front but again that sounds like poor leadership than anything else.

And explain to me why the Russians gained territory after WWII, while we reconstructed the lands we conquered?
 
Upvote 0
R

Redneck

Guest
Roman Solider brings up a great point of the number of theaters that the Americans had to fight in. Sorry that the Russians lost 20 million soldiers in their 1 front but again that sounds like poor leadership than anything else.

It certainly didn't help that Stalin was killing of the generals.

If I recall correctly, on a man for man basis, the German soldiers were a lot more effective than the Soviet soldiers. They also had far better leadership.
 
Upvote 0

TScott

Curmudgeon
Apr 19, 2002
3,353
161
76
Arizona
Visit site
✟11,974.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Democrat
alexgb00 said:
America, separated from most of the world by two oceans, has a very big navy, and the American marines comprise an entire branch of the service.
That's not true. The US Marine Corps is part of the US Navy. You will find Marines stationed on all US Navy warships.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

alexgb00

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2002
649
26
38
Klamath Falls, OR United States
✟1,218.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
TScott said:
That's not true. The US Marine Corps is part of the US Navy. You will find Marines stationed on all US Navy warships.
That's technically the truth. But why do they differentiate the two in statistics? For example, in Vietnam, the navy lost 2535 killed, and the marines lost 14819. Why do they have different recruiting offices? The USN website (www.navy.mil) doesn't directly mention the Marine Corps, simply links to it like it does to the Army and the Air Force.

Fine, TScott. Just, whatever you say. I agree with you, because this is entirely an irrelevant point and if we continue, it will be a silly dispute.
 
Upvote 0

TScott

Curmudgeon
Apr 19, 2002
3,353
161
76
Arizona
Visit site
✟11,974.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Democrat
alexgb00 said:
That's technically the truth. But why do they differentiate the two in statistics? For example, in Vietnam, the navy lost 2535 killed, and the marines lost 14819. Why do they have different recruiting offices? The USN website (www.navy.mil) doesn't directly mention the Marine Corps, simply links to it like it does to the Army and the Air Force.

Fine, TScott. Just, whatever you say. I agree with you, because this is entirely an irrelevant point and if we continue, it will be a silly dispute.
Dude, if it's irrelevent why did you bring it up? If you don't want anyone to actually read what you write and respond to it, then why are you even here?
 
Upvote 0

alexgb00

Senior Member
Jun 24, 2002
649
26
38
Klamath Falls, OR United States
✟1,218.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Why do you come across to me as being kind of testy, TScott?

I "brought it up" as a respectful reply to your post, since i believe it to be slightly rude to ignore a post in my address. At the same time, i have been in discussions which have become derailed because of a small disagreement such as the one above, and which have lasted for pages and pages of bickering between several people. And our views are not contradictory, simply seen from different angles. In my opinion, this would be a waste of time, which is why i'd rather have you know that you're absolutely right in what you say and leave it at that. No upset feelings, right?
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Paisley Rose said:
I disagree, they worshipped the Emperor as a god. They had aspirations to rule the world, whether or not that was realistic. Look up the meaning of the symbol of the sun on their flag. You could argue that point endlessly....and guess what, I'm sure the generals and admirals knew better...but the common people did not.

What does Emperor worship have to do with this issue?

The Sun on the flag is exactly what it's meant to be "The Land of the Rising Sun." Japan greets the Sun rising over the Pacific before it moves on to start the day in the rest of Asia. What did you think it symbolizes, and what would that have to do with the topic?

And no, Japan did not want to rule the world. They wanted to secure their place as the power in the Eastern Pacific. The countries they attacked were specifically for that reason: China - labor, raw materials; Dutch East Indies - rubber and oil; French Indo-China - raw materials; Philippenes - control of shipping lanes, raw materials.

Why did they attack Pearl Harbor? To try and destroy the American Pacific fleet and secure a peace treaty as soon as possible from a position of power. If they wanted to conquer the world, they wouldn't have just attacked Pearl, they would have tried to take Hawaii and use it as a base to launch attacks on the U.S. mainland.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
R

Redneck

Guest
eaglex said:
If we had an Area 51 back then maybe we would have had the B-52 then. We could have bombed Tokyo from the mainland and sent Japan backinto the Stone Age . Another scenrio what if we had today's weapons back then.

mushroom.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Grey Eminence

Regular Member
Dec 8, 2004
666
14
43
✟874.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
CA-NDP
eaglex said:
If we had an Area 51 back then maybe we would have had the B-52 then. We could have bombed Tokyo from the mainland and sent Japan backinto the Stone Age . Another scenrio what if we had today's weapons back then.



The B-17 was largely the result of discussion between Boeing and the AAC prior to WWII. Interestingly enough Boeing practically went bankrupt on the B-17 contract. In the first 9 months of 1939 the company lost 2.6 million. It wasn't until Europe kicked funding that money finally went to buying B-17's. And keep in mind that at the start of WWII the B-17C was the version to be comming on the production line. You have quite a few more iterations to go until geting to the -52.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

MaryS

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2004
2,350
137
✟3,195.00
Faith
Christian
Politics
US-Republican
It's interesting that historians are still investigating and finding more details on WWII. I recall watching 'The Last Secrets of the Nazis' on the history channel and they showed how the Germans were over in Japan helping them build their arms and fighter jets shortly after WWI.

Some of the last film footage and letters gathered from various sources were compiled and shown on PBS as "The Perilous Fight: America's World War II in color" The film is available at the store section of www.pbs.org or by calling 1-800-PLAY PBS. It doesn't cover all the battles, but it certainly gave a good overall view of what was happening in America before and during the war. One thing that I especially learned that I didn't know from many other WWII books is how the Germans held a secret deal with the Russians to help them invade Poland and share the "spoils".

A bit of info from other history authors that I've kept books on:

-Relations between Japan and America were bad in the 1930's and they were worsened when the Japanese sank an American warship, the "Panay", on the Yangtze River in 1937. This was clear violation of treaties and an outright act of war. Following this action, Roosevelt began to ban exports to Japan of certain goods that eventually included gasoline, scrap iron, and oil. It was in July of 1941, after the Japanese invaded French Indochina, that Roosevelt froze Japan's assets in the USA, halting trade and cutting off Japanese oil supplies. That particular action was later cited by the Japanese as a cause for attacking the USA.
(German and Italian assets in the USA were already frozen and their consulates were ordered closed by Roosevelt in June of 1941...a response to the sinking of an American merchant ship by a U-boat near Brazil in May of 1941)

-In October of 1941, two US Destroyers were torpedoed by U-boats leaving 111 Americans dead. At this point Hitler knows that war with the USA is inevitable.

-By late in 1941, it was more than apparent that war was coming with Japan. American and foreign diplomats in Japan dispatched frequent warnings about the Japanese mood. The Japanese diplmatic code had been broken by American Intelligence. Almost all messages between Tokyo and its embassy in Washington were being intercepted and understood by Washington.

-There is no longer any doubt that some Americans knew that "Zero Hour", as the Japanese Ambassador to Washington called the planned attack, was scheduled for December 7. They even knew it would come at Pearl Harbor. According to John Toland's account of Pearl Harbor, 'Infamy', Americans had not only broken the Japanese code, but the Dutch had done so as well, and their warnings had been passed on to Washington. A British double agent code-named Tricycle had also sent explicit warnings to the United States.

-The Yalta Conference established which countries would remain under the which allied powers. Churchill and General Patton urged for their armies to push further eastward to avoid the Russians controlling lands they were occupying, but Eisenhower and Roosevelt decided to let the lands fall to the Soviet "liberators".
In 1945, Churchill gave his speech telling the world "An Iron Curtain has descended across the continent, allowing 'police governments' to rule Eastern Europe. One war over and the next--The Cold War--was under way.

Certainly when Hitler turned on Russia, it gave Roosevelt the war he wanted. I still don't know why my relatives that fought on the European front said they would prefer to surrender to the Germans over the Russians if they had a choice. I just remember one uncle talking about the horrors of the Russian gulags.


I often wonder if the USA had taken action against the Japanese after their attack in 1937. If we had been prepared and struck back at that early time, it may have scared the Germans and Italians enough to give them serious doubts about messing around enough to rattle the USA. Tens of millions of lives could have been saved.

I've read some about the millions that lost their lives in the Ukraine, but I don't remember the details. I do recall reading articles that the USA media's foreign reporters were negligent to report it when it was happening.
 
Upvote 0