US IRON

Very interesting read guys, but I think that one needs to look at the wider geopolitical situation, than just a focus on WW2, to decide whether the US could have beaten back the Soviets at the end of the war. Wars are fought with Money and Politics, and there is no nation capable of winning a war against the US the past 100 years, even ignoring the atomic bomb. The Soviets, Johnny Taliban and the Vietcong would have had their asses handed to them on a plate had the US been commited to a war. They just decided the price of victory was too high.

A superior nation (ie economy) will always defeat an inferior nation (weaker economy) IF politics did not play. Even just trying to provide a counter weight to the US in peace time, the Soviet Union went bankrupt.

I don't think it is fair to say that the Germans had more respect for Monty as a General than Patton. Monty took on the German war machine at its peak. By the time Patton was rolling through Europe, the German army (and the SS) were in a terrible state (no supplies, fuel, airforce, or hope of winning the war). A really good book to read, to get the picture of how broken the German army was towards the end of the war, is "The Forgotten Soldier".

Stormin Norman fought one of the most pathetic militaries on Earth (Saddam's forces in Iraq), but that doesn't make him any less good a General.

Tanque

A this point in time it's difficult to theorize just what would have happened had the Yalta conference generated a different 'agreement' and WWII era USSR had been contained
more instead of what happened.

I do know this.

1) WWII American surplus of all types was still being sold new in original packaging well into the 1980s

2) The Berlin airlift of 1947-48 might give you an idea what could have been done to augment supplies anywhere in Europe had they been needed

3) Having had the opportunity to speak directly with Walter Schuck in 2009 the Germans were definitely not afraid of the Soviet air force.

Jerry

Cruiser133

Again, nowhere did I state allied aircraft were "bullet proof". I simply retorted to your earlier assertion the Soviets could match front line American and British aircraft to contest air superiority which you need to advance, take AND hold ground. To further enlighten you, we sent the P-39 Airacobra in large numbers to the Soviets through lend lease. The P-39 was deemed to not meet our needs as a air superiority fighter due to the weak at high altitude Allison engine. The Soviets on the other hand, did have many biplanes and other obsolete models which could not counter German 109's and 190's but the P-39 was seen as a vast improvement over what the Soviets had. Later YAK models were indeed better, but still inferior to their American and British counterparts. It was not until the MiG 15 the Soviets had a plane to contest American airpower and even then, the F-86 still had a vastly superior kill ratio.

I think you need to ask "Johnny Taliban" how successful it is to live in caves, have your country taken from you in under a month, have your leadership decimated and pushed to the brink of annihilation. It is American (And British, Canadian, Australian, ect) restraint which allows them to continue to exist on this planet.

I also was not referring to North Korean tactics either in regards to tank capabilities. After action reports showed the Pershing to be vastly superior to the T-34 in every category and could easily destroy it in tank on tank engagements. The 90mm could hole it through and though anywhere even at long distance. By the way, many of those tactics you disparage by the North Koreans where supplied by, or at least encourage by, their Soviet "advisors" who in many cases fought and flew alongside their communist "brothers".

Finally, technologically inferior armies may win battles or engagements, they hardly win wars. Look at the Romans, Egyptians, Greeks, or the Union in the American Civil War. Throughout history, these armies all had superior technology which helped them to win wars or outlast their enemies.

US IRON

The second world war can be likened to three alley cats having a fight.
Cat A is Germany, the weakest one, but the most aggressive with delusions of ruling the alley.
Cat B is Russia. Definitely the stronger cat as history has shown, but not aggressive. When Cat B gets pushed too far he fights back and is on the verge of annihilating Cat A, who no matter how good he thinks he is, he doesn't stand a chance in the long run. Germans on the Eastern Front came to know the Russian soldiers very well and realised they were not going to win.
Cat C is the USA. This cat is stronger than the other two, and when he eventually gets around to it, he steps in to break up the fight before Cat A is completley annihilated.

I have no doubt that the Soviets were stronger than Germany - history has shown this to be the case. But that they were stronger than the US at that time? No way.

I am replying to earlier postings by the way - I agree with the sentiments of Cruiser133.

Tanque

Now the Romans are an interesting subject to study any way you slice it. They may have stolen many ideas from lands and peoples they conquered but
nobody put it all together like they did at the time they did it....If certain Emperors' rule of the Empire hadn't been so repressive it would be interesting to
imagine what they would have accomplished. If they'd not ultimately failed and ushering in the Dark Ages our world would be very different indeed.

Jerry

Cruiser133

I agree, nobody "conquered" them in the traditional sense, they failed from within due to decadence, overreliance on foreigners and poor fiscal habits.....I fear we as Americans are doomed to repeat their mistakes....

I like your analogy to alley cats US Iron, we are indeed the "fat cats" who are determined once we put our minds to something or a cause to champion.

lposter

Interesting argument/discussion.

But some of the points are strange.

"Finally, technologically inferior armies may win battles or engagements, they hardly win wars."

They won the second world war. The Soviets were technologically inferior to the Germans. Yet they won. As Stalin himself said "quantity is its own quality". And they would have beaten the Axis whether or not the Allies landed in France or not. Might have taken a bit longer, but they could not lose teh war after Kurks. Ive never seen anyone even attempt to argue any differently.

As to whether the Allies could have gone on to beat the Soviets if they had turned on them..... (and Im not even going to bring up what "beating" them really is. A surrender? Allied control over the entire Soveit land mass?).

I doubt it. The Allied nuclear programme could not produce or have the means of delivering enough nuclear weapons within the four years it took the SOviets to catch up to ensure them being a war winning weapon against the soviets.

In the age of Hiroshima/Nagasaki style devices and the necessity to deliver them by slow large bomber planes.... I dont see how that would have stopped the soviets.

The two bombs over Japan killed a couple of hundred thousand people. The cost of those two bombs was about 500 million dollars per bomb in 1945 money. The entire projects cost 1/3 the cost of entire tank production for the war. By wars end the Hanford reactors were worn out and increased production would have required a rebuild.

Spending those sums of money to kill numbers of people that we know the soviets could absorb......its not viable.

Stalin knew everything about the Americ atomic bomb .... Robert Fuchs had told the Soviets and it still didnt seem to bother him.

That the Americans knew they probbaly couldnt beat the Soviets with conventional nuclear weapons underpinned the development of the neutron bomb which was solely designed to defeat huge slabs of Soviet armour which would have rolled over Europe and that was only thought of in 1958. Prior to that the Americans knew that normal nuclear weapons couldnt beat large scale tank armies which were the cornerstone of Soveit offensive might at the time.


WEstern allied forces were about 4.5 million men in Europe at the start of 1945. Soviet forces were 11.5 million men in 1945. They had 25000 operational tanks (Zaloga's "Red Army Handbook",).
Western allies had .... Shermans?

The allied navy was strong but that means nothing to Soviet Russia.

The argument that even if the Soviets pushed the allies out of europe, the US could win in the long run due to economic strength is tenuous at best as it assumes the Soviets had the same economic philosophy. It didnt.
With the soviets in control of europe, it had access to the largest slave population imaginable and as history shows, they were able to go from a green field site (the Urals) to mass production (Tankograd) in a matter of months simply because they didnt have the same scruples as the US when it came to worker rights/safety/pay.

While the arguments about who would have won if the allies attacked the Soviets in 1945 is pretty pointless, the assumption of an Allied/US victory over the Soviets based on either economy or technology is equally pointless.

And while the US had Patton and Montgomery....the Soviets had Zhukovs, Konievs and about fifty others. Who had blooded themselves on Mansteins and Rundstedts and had the promise of a bullet in the neck if they failed in their tasks.

The most Patton and Montgomery would have gotten if they had failed was an early retirement and a book deal.

I would imagine the bullet in the neck is the greater incentive.

p

Rex Ross

The pros and cons posted on this thread are very interesting to me. At the top of the main page is a sub forum with the title "War Room".

I think it would be more appropriate to post this type of subject on that site.

That's just my opinion.

Tanque

You are right of course Rex, I often just ' go with the flow' as many others regardless whether the post is misplaced or not.

Sooooo whatcha building Rex???

Jerry

Rex Ross

~~~~~~~~

Golly .... I was kind of afraid I was building a pot to stir up some stinky stuff with my comment. I really enjoyed seeing the different points of view about WW II. I think I just took too many grumpy old guy pills this morning. I have since taken a few silly pills and now would like to add to this thread.

This is the history of WW II as I remember it. I was just a kid back then ...... (born in April,1939).

The American army guys won the war. The British chaps helped out a bit. The Russians were all in Stalingrad trying not to starve or freeze to death. The Allies won because everybody had a Sherman tank, Thompson machine gun, B-17, P-40, Jeep, PT boat and aircraft carrier.

I tried to enlist in January, 1942, but at the time the Army didn't have olive drab diapers, so I got a deferment. I helped the war effort with scrap drives and buying the War Bond book that eventually got filled with those little 10 cent stamps. I finally got to join the Navy, but not until 1956. By then I didn't need diapers. However, I think I may need to use them again in a few more years.
As far as projects go, I still need to paint my GPA amphibious jeep, Elefant, Hetzer, 38(t) flakpanzer and Rheinmetall Cannon.

I gotta get organized and paint something. I'll start a separate thread on two new WIP projects soon. Maybe next weekend.

US IRON

AHH, I see I have shown my ignorance about WW2 history, my error. Ignore my comment about Patton and Monty. I see you guys are very knowledgeable on your WW2 history, very impressive. I haven't read any book on it in a while, and forgot that Monty fought throughout the war, not just in North Africa. The earlier comments make more sense to me now. I had to re-post to correct that.

I still contest that the US's strengths have been under estimated by some here. Hitlers only chance in my opinion was to eliminate Russia early in the war. A long drawn out battle will always favour those who have the money and resources to continue to wage an expensive war. I will concede though that a fair point has been raised - which is that economics is not always just about money - a large population is an alternate measure of a nations wealth. And Russia had that in spades.

I forgot to mention that I really enjoyed reading the original post about the Germans and Allies fighting together. Might get the book on it. Thanks for posting that very interesting story.

Cruiser133

I think some of you forget the soviets were lucky to have one rifle for three troops. You also forget that capitalism won. The soviets went bankrupt trying to keep up and thus proved who had the more viable economic policies. Look up reforager. It was NATO practicing holding off soviets columns as they tore through the fulda gap. The forces in Europe were only meant to be a speed bump until the bulk of us forces could respond from north america. This was not a concern in 1945 as the bulk was already in Europe. As far as tech, the soviets many would argue had superior tanks and thus a technological edge or at the very least parity with their German counterparts.

tomhugill

Whilst your "team America" attitude in the face of other fact backed arguments has been amusing for the last couple of pages it might e time to join the others in the thread and stop arguing the toss. The fact is thankfully the world didn't have to see what would happen if the two super powers went to war and for that I am eternally grateful. Anything else is conjecture.

lposter

I get the feeling that this thread has veered away from supported arguments pertaining to who might have won a clash in 1945 or the years after but I'll persist for a while yet.

IN 1945 the Soviets were no longer sharing rifles. They were well equipped with everything from food to fighter planes and the front line shock troops and guards armies had the best of everything.

Im not going to argue abut whether capitalism or communism won. Its a stupid argument. But right now, Russian tourism sites are open, their officials are getting paid, their military is being refurbished and Putin looks like pretty effective as a leader of a country that is probably difficult to lead. What state is the US in ?

All your stuff about the Fulda gap and so on is just nonsense. Offensive doctrines up to about 1990 are well documented and the results of every wargame conducted up to around 1980 indicated that soviet armour would be in France in less than a week and there was nothing that could be done to stop it - nuclear included. Thas why up to around 1960 the Germans maintained that it wasn't nuclear weapons that would stop the soviets but only strong anti tank measures.

With the soviets in France, Norway, Spain and Britain/Ireland smouldering nuclear ruins - where exactly were these American forces - in bulk or not - going to show up?

As to the bulk of US forces in Europe in 1945 - it seems the bulk of them were either whoring it up in the brothels of France or faffing about on the staffs of some general or other. Even American generals deplored the poor fighting spirit of most of their men. Naturally enough as the US was the only country in WWII not fighting for its very existence. I wouldn't be very committed either.

And somehow I just don't see the bulk of the US forces putting up much of a show against men who had spent 4 years fighting, had lost everything, had taken back most of what they lost and had then raped their way across large chunks of Europe. I just don't see it.

By any measure of victory (men killed, territory taken, booty captured etc etc.) the Soviets won WWII. The British survived it (not an easy job) and the US showed up at the end just in time for Patton to get his face on the camera.

Only the worst kind of western delusion facilitates the notion that it was any other way.

It might have been different if the Swedes had gotten involved as they are, as I see it, the only country that has ever come close to being able to say they beat the Russians.

P

Cruiser133

Of course it is pure conjecture and thus is highly entertaining. What I also find entertaining is a Norwegian disparaging US efforts in the second world war when his country was rolled in about a week by the German Army. The Soviets spent by some accounts 20 MILLION dead to "win" that war, wow great job....and how many more would have died had the allies not bombed the crap out of German infrastructure and pushed them out of France and the Ruhr.

The Soviets were bled white by a nation of about 40 million and this was with the help of committed allies, to think they could then roll a fully mechanized army with technological superiority and a population of over 200 million(1945) is delusional. What I find most insulting is some European and Russian members questioning American "fighting spirit" and the quality of the US soldier. Do you really think the war would have been won without the US?? The American GI has proved against all comers throughout our history the capability to fight and win and it wasn't "second line troops with old French tanks" either. Hitler saved up his best for the bulge with the most advanced equipment in the German inventory. Most Jagttigers and King Tigers were used in the west, not the east. Churchill himself thought the war was won when Pearl Harbor was bombed on December 7th, 1941.

I have also pointed out where the most decorated German pilot of all time had NO respect for his Soviets adversaries and was confident of victory had the western allies not intervened. If the Russians could have taken France in a "week", what stopped them? Why don't we look at how the mighty Soviets fared in a third world **** hole against goat herders stuck in the dark ages. Before any of you spout off about Vietnam, the major difference was the US won its battles but lost the war politically while the soviets just got their ass kicked. And to hold up Putin, a former KGB strongman, as a leader to be emulated is a farce. This same great guy has crushed political opposition and suppressed freedom and democracy.

Tanque

lposter

I dont have to disparage US efforts in the war.....your own generals were doing a good enough job of that. Not that I find it hard to understand...I wouldnt be bothered fighting to hard either if my family was living an ocean away. As one of your own once said....90% of US forces were in the field solely to draw fire for the 10% who were actually doing any worthwhile fighting.Although that can be said of many armies I suppose.


You really havent a clue. The number of farmers and clivilians getting killed can hardly be a reflection of whether or not they did a great job. Of the maximum estimate of 27 million war dead in teh USSR, 14 million is the maximum estimate of military casualities. It doesnt matter however. While the US army was getting held up by old men and kids with a faust and a set of balls, the Russians were getting the job done.

As to your heroic bombing efforts.....I suppose deep frying old women and children really helped the war effort. Or not....seeing as german war production actually increased while the US and the Allies kept killing civilians to pretend they were actually making a great contribution. Take care would you actually bomb military targets that might shoot back.

German war production increased dramatically in the last years of the war....irrespective of how much they were bombed. So what was the point exactly? Its an easy way to wage war but what does it achieve? Apart from having to avoid looking down the sharp end of a Mauser, all it achieves is dead civilians. Its not exactly heroic now is it?

[TABLE="width: 710"]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]1939[/TD]
[TD]1940[/TD]
[TD]1941[/TD]
[TD]1942[/TD]
[TD]1943[/TD]
[TD]1944[/TD]
[TD]1945[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Panzer I[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Panzer II[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]15[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]99[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]265[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]848[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]803[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]151[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Panzer 38(t)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]153[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]367[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]678[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]652[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1,008[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2,356[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1,335[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Panzer III[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]157[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1,054[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2,213[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2,958[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3,379[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4,752[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1,136[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Panzer IV[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]45[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]368[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]467[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]994[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3,822[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]6,625[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1,09[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Panzer V Panther[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1,849[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4,003[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]705[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Panzer VI H Tiger I[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]78[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]649[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]641[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Panzer VI B Tiger II[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]428[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]140[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Dornier Do 17[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]9[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Dornier Do 217[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]157[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]207[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Dornier Do 335[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]7[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Focke-Wulf Fw 190[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]228[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1850[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2171[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]7488[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1630[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Focke-Wulf Ta 152[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]34[/TD]
[TD] ?[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Focke-Wulf Ta 154[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Heinkel He 162[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]116[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Heinkel He 219[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]11[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]195[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]62[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Junkers Ju 88[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]62[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]66[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]257[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]706[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2513[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]355[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Messerschmitt Bf 109[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]449[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1667[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2764[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2657[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]6013[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]12807[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2798[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Messerschmitt Bf 110[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]156[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1006[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]594[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]501[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]641[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]128[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Messerschmitt Me 163[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]327[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]37[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Messerschmitt Me 210[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]92[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]93[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]89[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]74[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Messerschmitt Me 262[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]564[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]730[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Messerschmitt Me 410[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]271[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]629[/TD]
[TD]-[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]614[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2735[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3744[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]5358[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]10059[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]24981[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]5732[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


The Soviet state that got "rolled" was attacked by surprise, was underarmed, had obsolete technology and was hampered by a dictator. The Soviet state that the fairly average US army was going to have to face was a different thing altogether.

They probably wouldnt have had to do much "rolling " anyhow. I imagine the cases of trench foot in the Allied armies would have skyrocketed once they realised they werent fighting old men anymore.


It was won before D-Day. It was won at Kursk. No one has ever suggested the Germans could ever recover.


Apparently I have entered too many characters... I will continue below...

lposter

double post

lposter

Lets have some quotes:

"The scale and grandeur of the Russian effort mark it as the greatest military achievement in all history". - General Douglas Macarthur, Supreme Allied Commander of South-West Pacific

"On the European Front the most important development of the past year has been the crushing offensive of the Great Armies of Russia"... - President Franklin D. Roosevelt (April 29, 1942)

The tanks might have been there but they had no petrol. Then again, if the Germans had advanced on bicycles they probably would have made as much progress given the pandemic nature of "panzer fright" in the Allied forces.

AS most students of history know (I am not counting you among them), the Soviet state of the 1940s through 1960 probably was more concerned with the enemy within, that being the prevailing doctrine of the time. By the time they got to Berlin and the war was over, Stalins mind turned towards checking the burgeoning popularity of his own generals - that posing a greater threat to him than anything else. Why would he continue to France? He wasnt at war with the allies at that point. We are discussing what would happen if he went to war against them.

You are getting confused.

B

They fared about the same as the US did/are doing. At least teh Soviets learned their lesson and got out. Unlike teh US who are still there. The only thing worse than getting your foot stuck in a hole of any kind is being stupid enough to leave it there. Then again, having seen the Russians get stuck there....one wonders why the US thought it was going to do any better?

The Soviets werent really in Vietnam. If you mean Afghanistan (I think you call it "**** hole")... their ass is no more kicked than Uncle Sams.

Good for him. At least he is leading the country.

Again ...too many characters.....

lposter

Your arguments are so painfully poor its really not worth arguing with you. For all your talk, the US with their "economic power house" were out prodcued by the Soviets throughout the whole war:
[TABLE="width: 826"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Tansk/spgs <75 mm
[/TD]
[TD]Tansk/spgs >75 mm
[/TD]
[TD]Artillery
[/TD]
[TD]Mortars
[/TD]
[TD]Machine guns
[/TD]
[TD]Trucks
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Soviet Union
[/TD]
[TD]105,251
[/TD]
[TD]92,595
[/TD]
[TD]516,648
[/TD]
[TD]200,300
[/TD]
[TD]1,477,400
[/TD]
[TD]197,100
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]United States
[/TD]
[TD]102,410
[/TD]
[TD]71,067
[/TD]
[TD]257,390
[/TD]
[TD]105,055
[/TD]
[TD]2,679,840
[/TD]
[TD]2,382,311
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Harrison, Mark, "The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison", Cambridge University Press (1998).

And you were outproduced by a country which had lost all its industry , 27 million people, its whole airforce/tank park......and its still producedmore than the US. So who needed the US? Of course..... your trucks won WWII.


I think I am leaving this thread. Your arguments are poor and, even worse, poorly made. And your use of words like "**** holes" and so .... its indicative of am intellect that I am glad to say I dont encounter here much.

You would probably be much more at home on the comments section of CNN or FoxNews or somewhere.....

p

rivetcounter

I must point out in the strongest possible terms that you an American was the first to bring Vietnam into this subject which I must point out has no bearing what so ever to do with this discussion the discussion is 1945 not 1965 to 1975
Neither does Korea have any bearing as for Johnny Taliban, in your lifestyle a cave may be the worst thing that can happen to these people whom were born to war and occupation by foreign forces irrespective of nationality a cave is safe and bomb proof they will laugh at what you think is basic requirements fact remains TV 300+ channel on cable constant access to the net and e-mail through handys heating in winter ETC, they are to this day still undefeated and also have not defeated militarily any nation East or West but financially some western governments are not far off bankruptcy though this is more to do with Bankers (though not the IT chaps who work for them)

All throughout this conversation you have vastly exaggerated Russian losses first it was 1million to take Berlin when in fact it was 361,367 somewhat 638,633 less than your outrageously exaggerated claim this figure includes wounded and missing and includes the vicious battles of Halb and Seelow Heights then you say the Russians lost 20million to retake Norway, sorry but the only word I can find is Bollocks the Russians lost 24million in the whole war are you suggesting most were lost in Norway absolute crap and I won’t waste my time to find out what the casualties were

As for Hitler saving his Best for “Wacht am Rine” this is also ludicrous and his generals thought this also, Peiper is thought to have fielded about 20 Tiger II, this is about half an Abteilung this figure is based on battlefield reports of knocked out and captured Tiger II unless you are suggesting that some returned when it’s well known and documented that Peiper and his men walked out on foot as for most Tiger II being sent West and not East is just pathetic when it’s known exactly which units were issued with Tiger II and the numbers allocated by far the bulk went East fact.

In 1945 Russin tank forces were armed with T34, IS1, IS2 and its though some IS3 then there are the SU85, SU100 IS152 ETC Russia had a very sizable heavy tank force in the form of the IS series all mounting a large calibre gun while the west was predominantly armed with Pattons favoured Sherman a small number of Pershing a small number of Commets and Cromwells along with M10 and M36, obviously a Sherman in your mind with a low velocity 75mm gun was more than a match for an IS2 with a 122mm gun and armour upto 120mm thick

Another favourite of yours is the numbers game usually exaggerated, here is a population list from 1939 I will include Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as they made up USSR
US 131,028,000
England 47,760,000
Russia 168,524,000
Estonia 1,100,000
Latvia 1,900,000
Lithuania 2,500,000
USSR total is 174,024,000
The numbers speak for themselves

Cruiser133

I love how you two frame your argument to fit your revisionist narrative. For all those numbers which suggest the US was outproduced, you conveniently fail to mention the number of ships, aircraft, trucks, food, bullets and everything else the US produced in ADDITION to tanks and it was done to support two fronts on opposite sides of the globe. You think the soviets could match that?

You also type pretty aggressive stuff for a citizen of a country who hasn't produced a warrior of note for what, a thousand years?

I am glad you acknowledge the GI was not fighting for our land, so what does that tell you? Think hard now.

I guess Stalin was mistaken when he demanded a second front in Europe as the war was apparently already over according to you after Kursk.

Finally, I did not state it took 20 million to take Norway and I should have been more clear that it required over 1 million soviets to take Berlin. I know English is a second language for some of you so please reread my post before you respond.

US IRON

Yes very good "Team USA" , but that makes it sound as though there is another team out there (militarily speaking) that matters? We live in an American Age my friends. Everything that moves, floats or flies on this Earth is capable of being monitored by them (for peaceful purposes of course). The American Age began long before Hitler - the signs were there - he just didn't see them - just as his superiority complex blinded him to the reality of Russia. No matter the possible alternate endings to WW2, they all would have ended the same way - with the US as No 1.

Alot of people consider that the US is enjoying its pre-eminent place in the world today, because they won WW2 (almost like they waited till near the end to steal the glory....ridiculous). It is exactly the opposite. America won WW2 because they were already No 1, before the war started.

A few years ago I was at a dinner with someone who was convinced that the USA was bankrupt and would soon crumble. He was Greek. Now I can see the irony. Don't be fooled by what is going on over there right now. It is just an internal political power play.

lposter

I'll leave you to it gentlemen.

The vast majority of countries are in a position to judge their own contributions to WWII and be proud of them whilst not losing sight of their overall significance. Very few countries in the world today would attempt to deny the Soviets their due in having, by any measure one can apply, beaten the Germans. Whether or not the Soviets could have beaten the Allies in 1945 is a matter of interesting discussion.

Unfortunately we appear to be unable to keep to that discussion and have to try (some of us) to keep steering away from directions where terms such as "Johnny Taliban", "**** holes" and so on are the common parlance.

I would have hoped the moderators could have stepped in in relation to some of the more dubious comments and inferences made above but apparently not.

Seeing as the Greeks were mentioned above, I'll leave this thread making the observation that the GReeks were the only soldiers Hitler appeared to rate up to about the middle of the war:

“Historical justice obliges me to state that of the enemies who took up positions against us, the Greek soldier particularly fought with the highest courage. He capitulated only when further resistance had become impossible and useless." Hitler, 1941.

In fact he admired them so much as adversaries, that he promptly released all Greek POWs.....

Have fun....

p

Cruiser133

Careful US Iron, you will be labeled an American rube for daring to point out the obvious.

I find it ironic Iposter you attempt to take the intellectual high road and get sand in your ****** over my use of as expletive, then type this garbage, "While the US army was getting held up by old men and kids with a faust and a set of balls, the Russians were getting the job done.

As to your heroic bombing efforts.....I suppose deep frying old women and children really helped the war effort. Or not....seeing as German war production actually increased while the US and the Allies kept killing civilians to pretend they were actually making a great contribution. Take care would you actually bomb military targets that might shoot back."

Really? This coming from a citizen of a country that was not only quickly defeated and it peoples subjugated, it was also one of the few places STILL OCCUPIED by the German army at the end of the war. You question the courage and fighting spirit of the allied soldier when your people sat on the sidelines and in many cases collaborated with the Nazi regime?


Here is the rest of the story you arrogant troll. I can google numbers too, but I don't hide the facts.


[h=3]Vehicles and ground weapons[edit][/h][TABLE="class: wikitable sortable jquery-tablesorter"]
[TR]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Country[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Total tanks and self-propelled guns[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Tanks and self-propelled guns [SUP][1][/SUP][/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Artillery [SUP][2][/SUP][/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Mortars [SUP][3][/SUP][/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Machineguns [SUP][4][/SUP][/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Military trucks[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Soviet Union[/TD]
[TD]105,251[/TD]
[TD]92,595[/TD]
[TD]516,648[/TD]
[TD]200,300[/TD]
[TD]1,477,400[/TD]
[TD]197,100[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]United States[/TD]
[TD]102,410[/TD]
[TD]71,067[/TD]
[TD]257,390[/TD]
[TD]105,055[/TD]
[TD]2,679,840[/TD]
[TD]2,382,311[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]United Kingdom[/TD]
[TD]27,896[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]124,877[/TD]
[TD]102,950[/TD]
[TD]297,336[/TD]
[TD]480,943[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Canada[/TD]
[TD]5,678[/TD]
[TD]2,150[/TD]
[TD]43,552[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]251,925[/TD]
[TD]815,729[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Other Commonwealth[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]5,215[/TD]
[TD]46,014[/TD]
[TD]37,983[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Germany[/TD]
[TD]67,429[/TD]
[TD]43,920[/TD]
[TD]159,147[/TD]
[TD]73,484[/TD]
[TD]674,280[/TD]
[TD]345,914[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Japan[/TD]
[TD]2,515[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]13,350[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]380,000[/TD]
[TD]165,945[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Italy[/TD]
[TD]2,473[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]7,200[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]83,000[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hungary[/TD]
[TD]500[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]447[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]4,583[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[h=3]Aircraft[edit][/h][TABLE="class: wikitable sortable jquery-tablesorter"]
[TR]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Country[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Military aircraft of all types[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Fighter aircraft[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Attack aircraft[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Bomber aircraft[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Transport aircraft[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort"]Training aircraft[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]United States[/TD]
[TD]324,750[/TD]
[TD]99,950[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]97,810[/TD]
[TD]23,929[/TD]
[TD]57,623[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Soviet Union[/TD]
[TD]143,145[/TD]
[TD]63,087[/TD]
[TD]37,549[/TD]
[TD]21,116[/TD]
[TD]17,332[/TD]
[TD]4,061[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]United Kingdom[/TD]
[TD]131,549[/TD]
[TD]49,422[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]34,689[/TD]
[TD]1,784[SUP][5][/SUP][/TD]
[TD]31,864[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Canada[/TD]
[TD]16,431[/TD]
[TD]1,740[/TD]
[TD]1,134[/TD]
[TD]2,670[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]France [SUP][6][/SUP][/TD]
[TD]4,016[/TD]
[TD]1,597[SUP][7][/SUP][/TD]
[TD]280[/TD]
[TD]712[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Other Commonwealth[/TD]
[TD]3,081[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Germany[/TD]
[TD]119,307[/TD]
[TD]53,215[/TD]
[TD]12,539[/TD]
[TD]18,449 [SUP][8][/SUP][SUP][9][/SUP][/TD]
[TD]3,079[/TD]
[TD]11,546[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Japan[/TD]
[TD]76,320[/TD]
[TD]36,571[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]15,117[/TD]
[TD]2,110[/TD]
[TD]15,201[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Italy[/TD]
[TD]11,122[/TD]
[TD]4,510[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]2,063[/TD]
[TD]468[/TD]
[TD]1,769[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hungary[/TD]
[TD]1,046[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Romania[/TD]
[TD]1,000[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]