Messages

1

WWII discussion forum / Re: pacific blunder

« on: July 28, 2006, 07:08:14 AM »

Very possible, but that's a lot of changes to postulate. The best what-if I've seen has Yamamoto bombarding the west coast with the Yamato right after Pearl Harbor so the U.S. sues for peace.

2

WWII discussion forum / Re: pacific blunder

« on: July 25, 2006, 02:07:46 PM »

Their whole attitude led to a strategy of defeat. The Banzai principles, not portecting  the merchant fleet from submarines, never going after the logistical systems--Pearl, and using subs to attack warships instead of merchant ships, to name 2.

Japan just did not how to fight a mid-twentieth century war.

3

WWII discussion forum / Re: Greatest Axis Blunder

« on: July 25, 2006, 02:04:26 PM »

As long as the U.S. has help, like the Brits, Commonwealth and Soviets during WWII

4

WWII discussion forum / Re: How Hitler could have won WWII?

« on: July 25, 2006, 02:03:17 PM »

I admit the Germans narrowed the gap, and had they been fighting only Russia it would have made a BIG difference. And add that, if no lend-lease,  the soviets would need to curtail tankproduction  for trucks or have a very slow moving army, and the Germans have some viable options.

5

WWII discussion forum / Re: How Hitler could have won WWII?

« on: July 24, 2006, 02:49:40 PM »

You may be misreading Keegan and Collins.
Kirosheev gives received in 1944 as 4,000 heavy, 17,000 medium and 200 light for the Soviets, tanks only, not SPs. . Ellis gives Total tank and SP with 75mm and above for 1944 for Russia 28,483, for Germany, 18,576. I don't remember 29,000 for German tanks in 1944, let along tanks and SPs total for that year. Panzer Truppen lists of new Pz. 3  (including 5.0 cm) Pz, IV  Panthers and Tigers do not total 29,000 for the 1944, maybe half that at most. the breakdown is month by month, but few months total  3,000.

6

WWII discussion forum / Re: How Hitler could have won WWII?

« on: July 15, 2006, 09:27:42 AM »

Germany was not outproducing Russia in tanks and planes in 1944, but Russia would have to curtail some tank production to make trucks without lend-lease. The Germans were worn down by Dec. 1941 anyway. They had to strip the north and center to launch Blau, and even then used a lot of allied divisions on the flanks.  I don't see much changing until late 1942 or early 1943.
Once Manstein tries to releive Stalingrad, things get interesting. Panzers arrive sooner in 1942 rather than occupy the rest of France, can they breakthrough and save some of Sixth Army?

7

WWII discussion forum / Re: pacific blunder

« on: July 14, 2006, 09:32:11 AM »

The biggest pacific blunder was not launching a third attack at Pearl to cripple Hawaii as a base for the U.S.  Without a real knock-out blow, japan didn't have much of a chance.

8

WWII discussion forum / Re: Greatest Axis Blunder

« on: July 14, 2006, 09:30:23 AM »

The biggest blunder was starting Barbarossa while still fighting the U.K.
Nobody wins 2 front wars.