U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Thanksgiving Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:44 AM
 
Location: St. Augustine
9,258 posts, read 11,737,437 times
Reputation: 7422

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angus Podgorny View Post
Not to mention the sheer weight of numbers and their very good weapons systems. By 1945 the front-line Soviet combat troops were pretty damned good, and they had already proven more than willing to sustain huge casualties in order to win.
The Russians had also become superb at combat operations; deception and subsequent wrong footing of the Germans, driving deep and keeping the drive going and reinforcing success rather than failure; "deep battle". The Russians had excellent coordination of infantry, armor, artillery and tactical air power and the willingness and ability to pile it on. The Russians were tough, dedicated and inured to hardship. Germany was overmatched.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-06-2009, 08:00 AM
 
Location: Flo-Rida
1,975 posts, read 1,851,648 times
Reputation: 1503
I believe the Germans would have still lost due to invading the Soviet Union.

The Soviets had two invincible generals by the names of December and January.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 08:23 AM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,157 posts, read 26,433,604 times
Reputation: 3660
The reality was that WW II was very close for Stalin: had one or two things gone the other way-----------the USSR would have been a mere footnote in history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 02:00 PM
 
Location: Peoples Republic of Cali
9,588 posts, read 4,808,864 times
Reputation: 5393
here's an interesting thought, Did American involvement in the war in Europe actally save American lives?
Think about it, we would have beaten the Japanesse earlier, and we may have invaded Japan herself, costing an untold number of both American and Japanesse lives. THe bomb made an invasion not nessasary, but what if we had thier backs to the wall a year or 6 months earlier??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 04:06 PM
 
Location: St. Augustine
9,258 posts, read 11,737,437 times
Reputation: 7422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali BassMan View Post
here's an interesting thought, Did American involvement in the war in Europe actally save American lives?
Think about it, we would have beaten the Japanesse earlier, and we may have invaded Japan herself, costing an untold number of both American and Japanesse lives. THe bomb made an invasion not nessasary, but what if we had thier backs to the wall a year or 6 months earlier??

Interesting thought.

Note that many historians think that we wouldn't have invaded Japan anyway if we'd not had the bomb but instead we'd have isolated them, destroyed their transportation system and starved them into submission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 04:47 PM
 
900 posts, read 174,449 times
Reputation: 299
Although it is fair to note that invasion plans were already in place. It is true that the heavy casualties incurred on Okinawa (and the success of a relatively small number of Kamaikaze attacks) were giving the Joint Chiefs some tough nights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 08:46 PM
 
594 posts, read 1,097,601 times
Reputation: 690
"History would be a wonderful thing -- if it were only true"
-- Leo Tolstoy

I'm sure there have been a lot of conflicting opinions among historians whether Germany could have defeated the Soviet Union if the Soviets hadn't received American aid. One thing is certain, without American help, the war might have dragged on for much longer and the human toll would have been even more horrific. As has been mentioned, the Russians received well over $10 billion dollars in materiel, which would be about $120 billion in current dollars! Compared to today's military budgets that doesn't seem like much, but it represented a lot of Studebaker trucks, K-Rations etc that helped fuel the way to Berlin. By the way, about 70 percent of these supplies came through Iran via the Persian Gulf.

This is not to slight the Soviets, who largely bore the brunt of the European war, but one has to wonder what might have happened had there been no aid and no prospect of a second front. It's possible that in the darkest days of the war, with the Wehrmacht at the gates of Stalingrad and German troops on the outskirts of the Soviet oil fields, that Stalin might have lost his nerve and sued for peace, hoping to salvage as much as possible from a desperate situation. As it was, he was able to buy time for his reeling armies. I would say American help was immeasurable in bolstering the Soviet armies.

As an aside, I have recently been reading a little more about the battle of Kursk. Until Gorbachev's glasnost, there was little accurate Russian information made available to historians. Until that time, only the German documents were open to historians. As a consequence, historians have had to make some revisions in recent years. One was that Kursk was far more than a tank battle. Historian John Keegan said, "Although often thought of as a tank battle, Kursk, as a whole, arguably demonstrated the triumph of artillery, infantry, and engineers over armour. The Soviet plan was to soak up the German assault in a colossal web of defensive positions, and only then launch their armoured counter-attack. It was also an important air battle in which the balance now shifted to the Soviets."

Another item I came across is that General Guderian asked the question of Hitler: Why attack the Kursk salient at all? "The entire world doesn't care if we capture Kursk or not. What is the reason that is forcing us to attack this year on Kursk, or even move on the Eastern Front? " Hitler is said to have replied,, "I know. The thought of it turns my stomach." It's very evident, however, that Hitler didn't listen to his best generals like Guderian and Manstein, but often brushed their opinions aside with disastrous results, of which Kursk was one. German reconnaissance made them well aware of the massive Soviet buildup in the Kursk salient. Despite that, Hitler was looking for a dramatic strike that would turn the tide of the war. On the Soviet side, their informants had already ferreted out the German plan of attack. It was to be the last big German offensive in the East.

A good, short descritption of the battle of Kursk is one by George M. Nipe, jr, in the following link:

Battle of Kursk: Germany’s Lost Victory in World War II HistoryNet
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 08:47 PM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,157 posts, read 26,433,604 times
Reputation: 3660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishtom29 View Post
Interesting thought.

Note that many historians think that we wouldn't have invaded Japan anyway if we'd not had the bomb but instead we'd have isolated them, destroyed their transportation system and starved them into submission.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angus Podgorny View Post
Although it is fair to note that invasion plans were already in place. It is true that the heavy casualties incurred on Okinawa (and the success of a relatively small number of Kamaikaze attacks) were giving the Joint Chiefs some tough nights.
Remember though that Japan was defanged by 1943-44 and; as it was, the Allies were burning that country down city by city----------just that the atomic bomb drove home the fact that Japan could not win at any cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2009, 01:23 AM
 
900 posts, read 174,449 times
Reputation: 299
They might have been de-fanged as an effective offensive military force, but they were certainly not de-fanged as an effective defensive military force.

The battle of Okinawa gives testament to how expensive the Japanese could make it for an attacking force, and Okinawa was nothing compared to what we would have faced attacking the Japanese homeland.

They would not have surrendered without either the atomic bomb or an invasion, in my opinion. Tens of thousands of allied POW's wouldn't have survived an extended blockade or isolation of Japan, and God knows how many Japanese would have died.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2009, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,157 posts, read 26,433,604 times
Reputation: 3660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angus Podgorny View Post
They might have been de-fanged as an effective offensive military force, but they were certainly not de-fanged as an effective defensive military force.

The battle of Okinawa gives testament to how expensive the Japanese could make it for an attacking force, and Okinawa was nothing compared to what we would have faced attacking the Japanese homeland.

They would not have surrendered without either the atomic bomb or an invasion, in my opinion. Tens of thousands of allied POW's wouldn't have survived an extended blockade or isolation of Japan, and God knows how many Japanese would have died.
Hence my comments.............starvation and no more oil/gas for airplanes, etc. would have ultimately crippled even Japan's defensive capabilities. Remember that Japan would have been unable to feed itself----------especially if the Allies decimated their rice paddies, etc. via incendiary bombs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:08 PM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top