MVB's Thesis, shorthand

[MVB]

All 50+ pages counting bibliography and what-not, basically make the following statement

Americans couldn't tell who to hate more over the course of World War II, changing their opinion frequently, and in response to the actions of Germany and Japan.

HOWEVER, Americans never had a great hatred or dislike for the German PEOPLE, blaming the Holocaust AND the War on Hitler and the German leadership. Regarding Japan, however, America actually HATED all Japanese, even to the point of one poll showing that 15% of Americans wanted every living Japanese man, woman and child exterminated, which is a greater % than the number of Germans who wanted every living Jewish man, woman and child exterminated (to put things in perspective).

Americans hated Hitler and the German actions, but they hated the Japanese as an entity.

[Justice]

Kind of ironic that we trust Japan explicitly enough now to try and get them a seat on the U.N. Security Council, and interweave our economy with theirs.

cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

[/<yle]

Japan has come a long ways culturally.

[MVB]

That's because the goddamned Japanese refused to believe they'd done anything atrocious during World War II, and somehow pulled that off over the rest of the world, when their atrocities were significantly worse, and significantly less race-specific, than those perpetrated against the Jews. Of course nobody even knows or think that. You think about atrocities in World War II, and immediately think "Germany," not Japan, yet the Japanese went so far as to use LIVE AMERICAN PRISONERS OF WAR as the Medical "cadavers" for Japanese Medical Students, and the Jap Med Students actually USED Them, cutting them wide open while they were bound and gagged and screaming through their binds.


Check this out ....

There is a memorial to the atomic bomb drop on Japan, IN Japan. It has a little movie, and in it, the happy, big-eyed smiling Japanese are all having a nice day, when this plane goes overhead, and they all look scared. In the plane, the American pilots all have evil eyes, pointy teeth, and long sharp fingernails.

They drop the bomb, all the poor happy Japanese die, and the Americans are depicted laughing and giggling about it, sharpy pointy n ails and teeth and all.

The Japanese honestly believe they did nothing wrong in World War II, we caused hte war by treating them poorly economically, and they committed 0 atrocities.

[Justice]

They never apologized to the Chinese for the Nanjing massacre.

They never apologized to the Americans for Pearl Harbor.

They never apologized to treating prisoners of war as pieces of worthless shit.

You make your decision. I like MVB more now.

cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

[MVB]

Japan has not come a long way culturally. They are still too driven by honor, and in World War II that was their problem. They believed that to surrender meant surrendering your very life, and they believed this applied to ALL people and nations. Either you one, died losing, or surrendered and made yourself worthless in the process. This is why they slaughtered 200,000 at Nanjing; this is why they openly mistreated and slaughtered all manner of prisoners of war. This is why they were a million times worse than the Germans, who did not GENERALLY mistreat prisoners of war, only people they didn't like (such as the Jews).

[Ummon]

It's sad but true, given that I love some aspects of Japanese culture.

[CELTIC_2X]

i am not up to date with the USA and Japan side of WW2, being britsh u were never taught about that side of things in school, were the japanese in league with the germans? wat was the motive 4 going to war?

[Justice]

Their motive for war was like any other: wanting more territory.

The Japanese weren't satisfied with the territory they were offered by the League of Nations and the Treaty of Versailles. Because of this, in the 1930's, they broke away from the League of Nations and broke the treaties to produce a massive military buildup. With this new military, Japan spread outwards, invading places such as Korea, China, India, the Philippines, etc. At its height, the Japanese empire encompassed this area:

http://www.foxvalleyhistory.org/WWII/images/map-japan-md.jpg

Due to new attacks, the United States cut off oil supplies to Japan, which was heavily dependent on U.S. oil exports to maintain its army and navy. Japan, who was furious at American "defiance" and the American attitude towards Japan, knew that America might enter the war soon and strike hard. So, they devised the attacks at Pearl Harbor to try and wipe out the American Pacific Fleet so the U.S. wouldn't pose a threat to them.

Admiral Yamamoto and his fleet of 4 aircraft carriers and accompanying destroyers and cruisers set out on a trek that would take them across the Pacific Ocean into striking distance within Hawaii. Fortunately, on that day, the primary targets of the Japanese, the U.S. aircraft carriers, weren't in harbor. What they did destroy were battleships, cruisers, airfields/airplanes, and a lot of logistics stuff that were key to the U.S. war machine. After failing to destroy the American aircraft carriers, Yamamoto said, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant."

Furious, President Franklin Roosevelt said the next day, "It is a day that will live in infamy." On December 8th, 1941, the United States of America declared war against Germany, Italy, and Japan. The rest is history.

cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

[MVB]

Japan wanted territory, but that was not their reason at all for going to war with America.

They were in league completely with Germany.

They killed a shitload of Aussies and Brits, so I'm surprised you didn't learn about it. Your school needed better WW2 history teachers. I will explain more later on, when I'm not in the middle of working on something.

[Justice]

I know they did. However, that wasn't really a reason why the U.S. went to war, was it? The U.S. tried to help aussies and brits in South Asia, but prior to that they didn't enter the war.

BTW, we don't learn about WWII until much later this year, before the AP's. All this knowledge is my prior knowledge on the subject.

The reason why the U.S. declared war on Germany and Italy as well was because Japan was in an alliance with them.

cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

[MVB]

The US did not declare war on Germany. Germany declared war on the US.

[CELTIC_2X]

well i wouldnt knock my school, i doubt u went into the depth we did about WW2, the europe side of things that is, we also devoted alot of our time learning about hitler himself, u c its all alot closer to home. thx justice 4 the explanation, cutting off the oil would hav been devistateing seeing as they hav very little or none of there own. seems from a british point of veiw that they kicked u into action in time to save the war 4 us, although that is in no way condoling wat they did,

i no alot of indians and aussis were fighting 4 us in europe, i wasnt aware they were being atacked by the japanese.

[MVB]

The Japanese were attacking ACTUAL British soldiers as well. The British themselves had naval vessels and actual soldiers all throughout the Pacific, especially the areas closest to SouthEast Asia, and they were heavily engaged in that theater.

It is highly unlikely you went into the depth I have about World War II, simply because it is my primary focus area in my major; I have studied it in several classes, and spent literally hundreds of hours this semester alone researching it heavily as I am writing my thesis on the subject of world war II.

I will agree that the Japanese saved the war for Britain and Europe. Fortunately or unfortunately, Britain didn't have the manufacturing capability to remain involved in war with Germany, and Russia did not have the capacity to defeat Germany should all her might have been brought to bear.

British pro-peace-settlement sentiment was at an all-time high until America became involved in the war, when the Brits were highly bolstered confidence-wise and decided to side with Churchill and definitely fight it out. By having the US to worry about, Germany had to keep crack divisions in North Africa and Western Europe that were unable to act as a rotating reserve for the campaign against the USSR. American economic and industrial production, in 1941, was more than 80% of the world level. This meant that of all the goods produced in the world, 80% of them were made in America. When America joined the war, it was over for everyone opposed to them. One *could* argue that the world as a whole could not have stood against America, because by 1941 wars were more production and economy oriented than they were "military genius" oriented, as proven by the utter failure of the Japanese to win, despite better military minds, and even a much better trained and equipped army and navy at the outset. Every nation on Earth combined to produce only 20% of world production. All the rest came from America.

That, and really nothing else in the greater scheme of things, is why the allies won World War II; American economic and industrial might. We simply overwhelmed everyone else.


As a side note on the Soviet Union:
The comments made about their overwhelming #'s and how Germany could never have defeated them are inappropriate. The Russians lost more than 20 million people to the Germans, both battle casualties and exterminations of large portions of the population by the Germans when they captured Russian villages and cities. Even if Germany was forced to withdraw for a while from Russia, the USSR had no population to return to the areas of the nation it retook. This was moot when they were able to invade Germany after the German withdrawal, thanks to pressure from the Western Allies on the other side, but the Russians did not have the ability to maintain a long drawn-out war with Germany ... as is, they BARELY survived a war of only a couple years. It was only when Germany had to withdraw large #'s of its troops from Russia to defend the collapsing Western Front and Italy that Russia even had a chance to counterattack.

[CELTIC_2X]

wow u know ur stuff mate, but one thing i wondering aboot was, when u said we lost the manufacturing capeabilty to remain in the war, at wat point was this? and do u mean that we just lost the abilty to produce tanks, warships, palnes ect. or do u mean the entire miltary was unable to operate? b/c i was under the impression that we thought all the way till the end of the war

thx 4 the info btw guys

[tom]

Remind me not to choose history as a major.

[MVB]

Britain produced almost no warships during the war, although they got a few out.

After 1941, more than 90% of British tanks, warships, planes, etc. were built in America. Americans built your tanks, your planes (spitfires and all), your guns, artillery, even a lot of your uniforms.

Your military operated because America kept it equipped.

Additionally, the British infantry was woefully unprepared for World War II ... most British infantrymen were from skirmishes and what-not in India and Africa, and had no idea how to fight in full-scale big battles, and were no more prepared than American soldiers to actually FIGHT; the myth of the British providing the fighting skill while the Americans provided the economy is just that -- a myth.

That being said, the British soldiers and generals did not do badly at all, and should be commended, but it should stop there. A lot of people are of the mistaken belief that Britain did something amazing, mind-boggling and unreasonably heroic during World War II, and that's just not the case. The battle over Britain, even, was basically the Germans half-heartedly attempting to convine the Brits to surrender, and not a full-scale assault by any stretch of the imagination.

Also, MANY more British planes were shot down during that Battle than Luftwaffe planes, but every time a German pilot parachuted out, he became a P.O.W. ... every time a British pilot parachuted out, he hopped right back in an American-built Spitfire or Mosquito or whatever.

[CELTIC_2X]

ahh i c, i was allways of the impression that the only reason that we didnt fall like france, was b/c of our geography, being a isle and all, i was all so un aware that the USA built most of our militry equipment, but as u say no 1 was realy prepared 4 the germans in the first place, i am currently living in jeresy, uk in the channel islands, just off france, but britsh islands, they were ocupied during the war, i no that is a little off the topic but i just thought i would share a wee intersting local fact 4 ya.

thank u again 4 enlightening me

[MVB]

Germany was fully able to invade Britain, and the British were ill-prepared to stop them, but Hitler didn't really want to. He actually often said he felt a kinship with the British people due to their shared ancestry, and much preferred a British surrender, and frequently demanded it of them. Hitler HATED the Russians. He wanted to crush Soviet power, he wanted to accomplish what Napoleon had not been able to, and he wanted to get at the millions of Jews living in Russian-controlled areas (the Russians, allies of the Germans until the 1941 betrayal, were not overly helpful in accomodating German demands for Jewish relocation and decimation). He obsessed over the idea of conquering Russia, and insisted on pursuing the course of doing so.

His generals suggested smashing Britain first, but Hitler believed -- and he may have had a right to, considering the sloppy performance of the British up to that point in time -- the British would not last much longer regardless, and had no real ability to hit back (he was right, but by not conquering the British isles and North Africa, he basically gave the US free launch-points and bases of operations). Hitler would have been much better off finishing Britain before attacking Russia, and this was Roosevelt's greatest fear.

You see, my paper is on American public opinion regarding JApan and Germany, and I've found that when Britain started the war, the American people were solidly behind the idea of helping them out in some way (though not war at first). Americans ALSO at the time believed that France and Britain would win the war easily against Germany.

So, note this: War breaks out, Americans think
a) France and Britain will win easily, so
b) Let's help out

As France gets omgwtfpwned, and Britain is jammed onto her island and hanging on by a thread, Americans all of a sudden think
a) Britain might lose, so
b) Let's not get involved, this is Europe's war

Americans at this point in time really weren't "kicked up" yet, and while they didn't really like Germany, they liked the German people and they didn't want to get involved in a war that might cost a lot of lives (namely, a war where Britain and France weren't kicking ass and doing most of the work).

If Japan hadn't done what they did, America might not have fought. Most Americans thought we should kick Japan's ass before Pearl Harbor, but also thought Japan posed NO real military threat, so why go after them. We figured we'd cow them into submission with economic sanctions. Americans disliked Germany and Japan, but didn't *really* want war.

Japan did something enormously stupid, and the result was world-saving.

SO, in reality, it was Japanese stupidity that saved the world in 1941.

[CELTIC_2X]

ahh i follow now, i did no that about hitler likeing us, all and all thank u very much for the history lession.

[Justice]

two grave mistakes made that cost him the war:

Dunkirk

Invading Russia.


cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

[MVB]

No; Dunkirk was worthless.
Invading Russia would have worked if he had killed Britain first.

Here's the point you're missing:

Germany beat the living shit out of Britain, just ... holy crap owned them, but when they had the chance to finish them, they didn't.

If Germany beat the living shit out of Britain, they stole the SOUL of Russia, skewered them with red hot pokers, shot them in the back of the head with a shotgun, then pissed on their half-arsed dug grave.

Russia LOST. They did not "survive and use their vastness to force a German defeat." America came into the war, and Germany had to pull its units back. That's it.

Despite the foolhardiness of not finishing Britain first, if America had never entered the war Germany would have RELATIVELY easily been the first nation to totally completely humiliate whoever came up with the rule of not invading Russia.

[Polaris]

lets not forget that the russian winters defeated napoleon and hitler.
if hitler had invaded at a better time, it wouldnt have mattered about britain- he could have cut supply lines
the rest of this is quite intresting, though. im really enjoying the fruits of your labor, MVB- mind if i steal some of this stuff (appropriately credited, of course) for next semester US History?

[/<yle]

Hitler got 20 miles from Moscow, and Stalin had the ballz to try to dictate the terms of victory to the British ambassidor.

[MVB]

The winter didn't really slow down the Germans. They were toughing it out just fine. Problem was they had to leave for the reasons of the Western allies. They did not lose. The winter, the Russians, none of it defeated Germany.

Germany was beaten by the United States.

You may use my paper if you want; I'll share copies with any TLSC that want to read it after Friday.

[ilia]

Wow all this explains a lot of "plot holes" in my history book :P

gg MVB :thumbup

[Ummon]

The part on Hitler scrapping the invasion is false, IMHO. The German navy was unprepared to cover the attack and perform the landing, so that was the biggest operational problem. I saw the makeshift plans for Sea Lion, they were unrealistic and unconvincing. This was one of the main factors which made a quite unwilling Hitler finally say no on the thing.

[MVB]

Hitler NEVER wanted to invade England. Sea Lion wasn't even an intended plan; it was put together to help ruse British intelligence into thinking an invasion would actually occur.

If you'd like, after I recover from my WW2 revulsion upon finishing my thesis, I'll pull out some primary research and show you exactly what I'm talking about.

[P$Ü(||0]

well i agree to everything mvb said
how do u know so much about ww2?

[CELTIC_2X]

if u had read all that he said, u would no that it is his major,

MVB as i agree with what u say, about the USA saveing the war 4 the allies,

u do make it sound as if the britsh and french were completely imcompent, when they could have never matched germany in millitary might, as they like every one else was not prepared 4 the war.

although it is the case the US saved our ass's, if they had decided to to act sooner they would hav most likely saved millions of lives, u make it sound as if the US were the great hero's of WW2 but they only decided to step in when it was in there interset.

[MVB]

If you read carefully, you'll see I said the US didn't want to do anything. The American populace wanted no war with Europe, and if you read one of my posts, I stated that we as a public ONLY supported war with Germany when we thought the French and British were going to win ... in other words, when ya'll started losing, the American public basically went "we're not going to help those losers."

Talk about fair weather allies.

Japan in reality saved everyone's ass, because they kicked us in the teeth, forcing us to war. Hell, the US actually NEVER declared war on Germany. Germany honored its alliance to Japan and declared war on the US.

The US never had an interest directly in assisting Europe, and didn't ever actually have to step in; Germany and Japan basically didn't give them a choice.

The truth is that it's not about heroes or not; there were as many British heroes as there were American heroes, if you're talking about individuals, and the great British accomplishment was NOT giving up, when a lot of people thought they rightly should.

America WON the war. That doesn't make the United States a bunch of heroes. It's just what happened.

[DrunkenUno]

MVB, saying the British were not heroic is still incorrect. Hitler did not need to invade Britain because a lesser country would have simply surrendered over the constant daily air attacks. I mean, you certainly wont be having good morale if every day you have like a 25% chance of dying or becoming injured. I for one know that if the roles were reversed, with Britain somehow being knocked out quickly and France being the one being constantly bombed, that the French would prolly wind up surrendering without any invasion at all. The British heroically stood fast against the months long bombing attacks

Also, the invention of RADAR and the use of RADAR towers helped the inferior British planes to intercept the faster, superior german planes. Also, the fact that British (and the Americans who volunteered) pilots were often Veterans, while the German pilots were mainly rookies (as you said, allied pilots were shot down in the British controlled seas around england, and were quickly recovered), which allowed the Brits to SLIGHTLY brunt the attacks. Note that I do not agree with the fact that RADAR "saved" Britain, it simply allowed the RAF to lessen the number of bombers bombing them every day.

[CELTIC_2X]

that wraps it up nicely, that was the most interesting thread ever.

[DrunkenUno]

Justice that map you posted is also incorrect. Its not Japan at its "height," its Japan pre-war.

Remember that Japan immediately conquered the Phillippines, Guam, Wake, etc.

And MVB is completely correct that the myth of the Russian "winter" stopping Hitler is just that, a myth. While the winter certainly slowed progress, and many German units were undersupplied with winter gear, it was actually Hitler's stupid battle plans calling for a 3 pronged invasion.

In fact, Russia got omgwtfpwnbbqed more than any other country ever. The initial German invasion took them COMPLETELY by surprised, hell Stalin retreated to his room and didn't leave for days in shock. Remember that Germany had a NAP with Russia, even though they were old enemies. The Blitzkrieg across Ukraine and into Russia surrounded, cut off, and eliminated hundreds of thousands if not millions of troops. Russian troops themselves were also compeltely outclassed by German troops, and woefully unsupplied. New conscripts often were given 1 gun to share between 2 people. The Russian officer corp had been decimated in the purges of all their brightest and strongest and were unprepared to defend, and couldn't even think of counterattacking. And America itself eventually began to supply Russia with war materials(a big debate at the time... as we hated communists almost as much as we hated facists).

However that said... Russia's stand at Stalingrad is still amazing. And the fact that Russia managed to stay in the war for so long even in the face of getting daily wtfpwned is amazing as well. The strategy of moving all of their industry in the Urals to Siberia in order to keep churning out tanks was brilliant. And eventually the Russians invented tanks which were superior to the German ones, and began to wtfpwn the Germans (who, granted, were unable to reinforce their forces, as they were busy fighting in the West).

This is why I love what-ifs. If Japan had never attacked Pearl Harbor, the US would never entered the war (assuming there were no Lusitania-like instances with Germany/Japan, and if we were basically ignored). In this case, Hitler never would have invaded Russia, as he would have quickly wtfpwned Britain. So now we are left with a postwar world containing 4 continental superpowers, The US in NA, USSR in Eurasia, Nazi Germany in Europe, and the Japanese Empire in Asia/Pacific. Canada surely would have moved much closer to the US after losing its mother country, and Australia would look to us as well. So we might be looking at a Canada which votes to be annexed by the US for protection, and Australia as a close ally.

[MVB]

We wouldn't have entered even with Luistania incidents.

More than 10 American gunboats in the Pacific were SUNK by Japanese bombers attacking with deliberate knowledge they were American, and the US people didn't care at all. FDR desperately tried to use them, and the NUMEROUS sinkings of US ships in the Atlantic, as a call to war, but the US people were generally like "well, shit happens if you get your ass in the middle of somebody else's war."

The British people acted heroically, which I basically stated -- especially in somehow not giving up when by all rights they should have. There just exists a myth that the Battle of Britain was a great British triumph, when in reality it was a lot like the Russians -- the British getting owned daily, and simply not quitting anyway. Even veteran RAF pilots were horribly outpowered by the German planes, and got shot down all the time, relative to German losses, but there you have it ... location + resolve + will to go on.

As for the tanks, that's another story.

No tank made in the war, ever, including the best of the Russian T-34's and Ku's ever, EVER matched the German Tiger 1 and later King Tiger/Tiger 2 tanks. The lesser Panther series of tanks were even a little better than most Russian tanks, and the Shermans were laughably wussy ... Americans hated getting involved with tank battles front-on against German tanks.

Here's the problem, though ... the Germans hand-crafted every MBT (main battle tank) in their army. They didn't use an assembly line, and parts were not interchangeable because they were made individually for each tank. Their tanks were also incredibly complex -- the King Tiger had a fancy system where it had two sets of tracks -- road tracks and off-road tracks, and one would lower while the other would rise depending on the terrain. Problem was, when something broke down, it broke down more or less for good, because the engineers weren't out on the front with the tanks. More often than not, you saw King Tigers and Tigers being drawn by teams of horses and shit. It was hilarious. The Russians and Americans both mass-produced assembly line tanks. They were expendable, but more importantly RELIABLE. They didn't often break down, and if they did, lots of replacement parts were available, because the kits were plug and play. Basically the way Americans and Russians killed German tanks was they'd take suicide shots from the front to occupy the German guns, then run a few tanks around the rear of the almost ALWAYS immobile German tanks (I mean almost ALWAYS, you see movies like Saving Private Ryan where Tiger tanks come rolling into the city in 3 and 4 and 5 at a time ... that was a TINY # of tanks; early on German tanks were more reliable, though not as good, and so in the early battles in France you'd have literally 200 or 300 light German tanks surrounding and pounding apart lone and 5-group French tanks that were actually HUGE, tough armored behemoths, but which suffered from the same problems of the later Tigers -- ironic, I think) and shot 'em up from the rear and sides.

Interestingly, the King Tigers were horribly feared because they didn't have weak points. There are stories of 10 Shermans surrounding a King Tiger and pounding it to no avail, but having the KT's turret gears break down before it could kill all the Shermans.

Hitler had this fascination with having the "best" equipment of any side, and he did if you are talking about performance in a vacuum. His Jet "fighters" weren't even useful as fighters. The P-51's horribly owned them, because they just let the fighters overshoot. They had a very high minimum operating speed due to the fact that they were armored and heavy. P-51 mustangs weren't THAT much slower, and could throttle up to stick with them for long enough to fire off a kill shot at them, and could throttle down to let them overshoot. They were fast and tough and heavily-armored though, so Hitler loved them. Same applies with his tanks -- the Tiger series was big and tough and heavily-armored, and the King Tiger carried the equivalent of a fucking Rail gun in its turret, but they were ultimately useless.

[mOle]

british forces helped out in norway (where i just happens to live) russian forces helped out here aswell

[mOle]

besides russian forces have alwas been weak.. in WWI they had horses and sabre... russia is generally a poor country with no efficient coastline...

[Justice]

It was allied supplies that saved Russia from defeat.

cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

[DrunkenUno]

It was allied supplies that saved Russia from defeat.

cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

Wrong again, stop trying to make points.

[MVB]

You all will probably learn a lot about America figuring into the war from my paper; it'll be done tonight, probably, so PM me if you want a copy of the lengthy bastard :-)

[MVB]

OH, I dug up some stats, just for everyone to ponder.

The Germans engaged in the site-specific extermination of over 6 million European Jews.

The Japanese, in addition to killing more than 4 million Chinese soldiers, slaughtered more than 17 million Chinese civillians through murder, mass-murder, testing, biological weapons, etc. etc.

Kinda makes the Germans look like cupcakes.

[2biT]

Drunk is right.

S Ambrose says in one of his books (this isnt a direct quote) 'although its a gross generalisation to say it, but it was british ablity to inovate and invent and american brawn that wone the western front in ww2'
Now i know there where some american inventions that where execellent, (higgins boats, m1, mass produced shermans), but stuff that is usually over looked on the british side are LST's (without them = no d-day), radar, the floating habours, all the 'soe' inventions, the sas, the computer (which is a very sad story).

But the thing that truly beat the germans was the vastness of russia, and the most effective army in that period ie: the red army.

A few noticable facts(ish):

T-34's where just about the 'best' tank in ww2 for reasons drunk/mvb posted.
The ppsh was the best smg at the time and so was the red army tactics/organisation post '41.
The winter offencives in '41 (germans got within 80 miles of moscow -similar to neapolian) and '42 (the encirclement of stalingrad) effectivly stopped the germans at the hight of there power.
The most successful sniper in stalingrad wasnt vassily it was a fella called Zaccabus (~230 germans killed).
It was the first moden day army to have woman serve in the front lines (many snipers/artilary/tank crew's).
The seige of Lenningrad lasted 900 days, compared to stalingrad which lasted 6 months (~180 days).
It still used cavalry.
They also had the most effective spy ring (cant remeber what it was called) that generally knew what the germans plans where, ie: krusk (the largest tank battle in history).

[2biT]

Ill have a copy! ww2 is my hobby, i dont know much about the parcific war. As for the jap's i have 2 uncles both pow's. 1 had his leggs chopped off (he tryed to escape), the other wouldnt talk about his expericance. (both deceased now) The jap's where bad, but they still dont hold a candle to some of the acts that happend on the eastern front.

[MVB]

You'd be surprised. The Germans never dropped biological weapons on European cities.

[laserflip]

they raped too fucking many chinese girls and women...but can you blame them, really?

[Justice]

How can you justify that?

It's war ... it's enemies. Is that kind of war acceptable? Even in war, there are rules, and when they don't follow those rules, by god, just nuke them.

And Drunk, the allies (namely, Britain and the U.S.) DID provide supplies to Russia through transport routes up into the North Sea, around Norway, and into Northern Russia. That's why so many German ships and submarines patrolled that area - they sunk more merchant ships and escort destroyers than I can count.

cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

[MVB]

The German U-Boats sunk approximately 2,000 Allied Ships during the war. The Germans themselves lost more than 700 U-Boats of approximately 1150 built.

So, in other words, the Germans traded approximately 1 U-Boat for 3 Allied ships.

Americans did provide supplies to Russia, but mostly this was food. Russia was fully able to build its own military equipment.

A side note on Stalingrad -- it was one of the worst acts of genocide on one's own people, IMO, in history. The Russians held on by mass-slaughtering their own people, and basically providing more targets than the Germans could reasonably kill. IMO it was sick that the Russians did that to hold on, and sick that Hitler wasted so much effort on the city, when he could have bypassed it at any number of fordable locations along the Volga. He obsessed over the fact that it was NAMED Stalingrad, and believed if he could capture it, it would make him the better man.

[Justice]

It's a city ... they're surrounded ... if you cut off their food, their supplies, and move on, leaving a decent sized force behind to stop any counterattack, you can NOT get bogged down without advancing.

A rather blatant mistake made by the Germans.

cheers, and
-=</|awesomeparty|\>=-

[MVB]

I'm going to call you "reword everything MVB says" boy

And you'll be my sidekick.

[DrunkenUno]

[QUOTE=Justice]How can you justify that?
And Drunk, the allies (namely, Britain and the U.S.) DID provide supplies to Russia through transport routes up into the North Sea, around Norway, and into Northern Russia. That's why so many German ships and submarines patrolled that area - they sunk more merchant ships and escort destroyers than I can count.[QUOTE]

I never said they didnt. I said they didn't "save russia from defeat."

[/<yle]

Japs considered Chineese less than human.

[MVB]

Japs considered everyone less than human.

They took live American POWs, and donated them bound and gagged to Jap medical students to use as LIVE cadavers through med school (of course, they died on day 1 basically).

[Weavern]

Even thou that is inhuman and goes against most modern POW rules (possibly at the time also?) you have to admit they made good use of the resources in that instance. You have captured your enemies and you expect to win (they never would have surrendered and as a whole they thought themselves to win) so why not make use of your captured enemies to advance medical science in your own country. On a second note the # of other deaths make the death camps in europe look rather tame, I guess its just because it was one type of people and not many. :\

[2biT]

wrong mvb and justice.

The russians were not surrounded at stalingrad they had ~10% at the banks of the volga while the germans held 90% of the city for most of the battle.
The russians at stalingrad never sent in mass waves nor did they have a rifle between 2. Thats pure hollywood. The red army was well supplied from the volga/urals even from the tank factories (that produced tanks that the rolled straight into battle off the production lines). Saying that the irregular divisons ie: nkvd defence divisions in the early battles where under supplied, and some off the navy divisions in the september battles where under supplied. The problem was the lack of small unit tactics and the joint command structure of polical vs army officers (which changed to army command as the war progressed with the nkvd becomming more like the ss). And also the lack of air power (which was the biggest killer to any counter offencive that the red army launched in september). What people offen confuse is the structure of the divisions was under powered in terms of heavey weapons/numbers compared to almost every army at the time, the red army continously altered its allocation of support weapons and divisonal make up throughout the war. Most of the infantry at stalingrad was elite infantry that was actually navy/airborne (the red army pioneered airborne infintry, but it was a disaster every time they used it), which was specially trained for small unit tactics (street fighting etc..) meaning there performance was much better than the germans, as the battle progressed.

One must point out the number of people shot by the nkvd for desertion, was extraordinarry high. Espicially in the september battles.

As for the city becoming the most important thing on the front ie: a personal battle between Stalin/Hitler while this is in effect became true in the propogander campains. The battle posed a very bad statgegic problem for the germans. Leave the city and have a sallient in their lines that could be expolited, or occupy the city and keep a good contious line witch could become a effective supply base, for the next summer offencive. (due to the railway and air fields). This is the reverse for the red army that needed a sallient into germans lines (they did have one south from stalingrad anyway and was where the southern prong of the winter counter attack started). The real problem was paulus's ineffective command, and Hitlers refusal to retreat, which resulted in the destrcution of the 6th army.

[MVB]

2bit you've done this before. You've got good history, but a lot of it is flawed, and you're quick to attempt to point out flaws in other peoples' arguments when you shouldn't.

One of these days I'll whip out some primary source material and point out exactly where your'e going awry with a lot of this stuff.

[Polaris]

MVB, will you write my history book for me?
i feel so.... lied to.....
damn public education
btw, i think the only way the russians did anything productive in war was just outnumbering them- i remember my book saying that the vast majority of them were unequipped and generally found sticks and what not to fight... ouch
man, WWII seems like a miserable war to be in... i can almost empethize with the americans in that day, but at the same time...
i was never aware of all the japanese mass-killings, though. i knew they commited atrocities in china, but not that many. looking back on it with fresh eyes, im not so ashamed that we nuked them.... i'd always thought we'd taken it a bit too far, but now- i guess im just ambivelent

[2biT]

Please do mvb. If i get things wrong or mixed up then ill admit that i am, alot of my post's come from memory of the reserch i have done myself. My memory is largly fucked and i have forgotten most of the information/facts that i used to know, as Stalingrad and the Eastern Front in general was my serrious hobby when i was younger (so much so that i am putting down a work of fiction based arround the Stalingrad battle so i have been doing reserch into the red army and will be doing a whole lot more in the near future. Including a trip to Russia (i hope), to try and keep it authentic as possible, while remaining a good read). Being as you have majored (i take it in social studdies and ww2) i would take any idea's, source material, recomendations on books to read and a great boon, even if its only on the american ETO or PTO (a area i admit i know little about).

As for my argue ablity you are right i just love to argue, even if i know im wrong, i still love it (hell somtimes ill go on the wrong side just for fun). I think its because i did a massive public debate/speach thing when i was in school and was the one that took control of any group projects.. hell i loved being in charge and running things and dam anyone that questioned my authority or abilty. Ill try and restrain myself more. Sorry.

[2biT]

As from my posts ill try and make them more clear, as a few times i havnt got the jist i am trying to say right.

Examples:

Airborne units at Stalingrad - The Ten airborne divisions in '42 where reformed and changed into the 32nd-41st guard divisons in June and where put into the front at Stalingrad. Then again the 8 new airborne divisions that where trainned to replace them where also fromed into guard rifle divisions and sent to Stalingrad (December). And i admit they where not exactly 'elite' as the american 101st,82nd, and the british 6th became, they where generally better trainned than the balance of new conscripts. (some even had their wings).

As for the mass waves bit - The red army launched serveral counter attacks (september onwards), which where generally smashed due to german air power and other factors. This apears a waste of life (which it was mostly) but it did have a tactical goal to many of them, even if it was just to stop the germans. In the city itself the 13th elite guards, launched a river crossing attack that opened up a 'kessel' in the german controled south, that they held for a long perriod (i think out of 10'000 something like 320 surrvived at the end of the battle), this counter attack (supported by 39th,42nd) saved the river bank. This perriod of the battle was called later 'time is blood' (sorry had to put that in, i think that is a good description). These can be looked at as 'mass waves' but i wouldnt consider them as a non-tactical suicide charge. Anyway back to my point i was talking of sceens shown in 'enemy at the gates' with russians charging head long into german defences accross open ground, and getting gunned down by the nkvd when they retreat, as being pure hollywood, not the acutal operational conflicts.

The nkvd - i had missed typed above, nkvd shared command of the army pre '41 but as the war progressed they where relived of command of army troops, which reverted back to a primary army command. Red army divisions still had nkvd troops assigned but they had no real command powers. The nkvd them became like Stalin's ss in the way that they where his milatary arm, these nkvd divisions where mainly civilians, but where for the most 'die hard' communist simliar to the ss (they didnt take many prisoners, commited war crimes, etc..). They did June - November time durring the battle of Stalingrad, killed a high percentage of the city population, for collaberating or suspected desertion. No official numbers are kept (either classified or destoyed), but it is expected to be very high.

[2biT]

Polaris the allies had is easy on the western front compared to the eastern front, *this is a quote from memory so its not totally accurate* the allies faced at max 60 ish divisions the allies had 70+, the german troops where generally 'Ost' units that is conscripts from poland,russia,china.. basically everywhere. They where not well trainned, they did have german NCO's and officers though. The german forces where not commanded by their best generals (all though they where good). Compare this to the eastern front where its arround 150+ divisions on each side, with some of the best generals of the time..

The nearest the allies came to experiancing some of the conditions that where on the eastern front was at the battle of the bulge and cassino.

[MVB]

2bit, reading over my post, I think it was a little offensive to you, and I didn't mean it that way; thanks for not taking it badly.

My thesis is handed in; pm me if you want a copy to read.
Last night was spent in the arms of a heck of a lover.

I'm on Cloud 9, and you ALL should see the crankiness that has visibly plagued me over the past few months fade away in the bliss of graduation.

[2biT]

lol, i dont take offence mate be as harsh as i deserve.. :]

Either pm me a link to it or e-mail it to wicketblock@yahoo.co.uk


And please dont send gay porn to it, i already get enough.