It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lets settle this! Would the UK have survived WW2 without the USA.

page: 6
18
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok


Plus we are not Turtling!
We were fighting in Africa and the far east (remember we had the blasted Japanese to fight too!).

Winston Churchill said that the most dangerous moment of the war was when the Japanese attacked Ceylon: Easter Sunday 1942. If they had succeeded, the way to India would have been open and, in Churchill's words, the 'circle would have been closed', cutting Britain off from the resources of its empire.

The attack failed, not so much due to the heroic but incompetent British defence of the island but because the Japanese fleet (the same one that took out Pearl Harbour) was overextended and Mitsuo Fuchida's pilots couldn't sustain the attack. Still, it was a close thing. Burma had already fallen.


edit on 30/3/16 by Astyanax because: of war!




posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka


Securing the rail hubs of Western Europe was a much higher priority to the wartime Stavka than control of the road system.

How did they propose to deal with the inconvenience that Soviet rolling stock ran on 5' 6" gauge tracks and European railways are 4' 11 1/2" gauge?



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Without the us the nazis would have perfected the V series icbm and more then likely nuclear technology. The UK would have no idea what hit them. If I remember correctly i think Hitler believed the us would ally with him. I dont think the UK would have lasted very long without worldly allies not limited to the US.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

It was nothing of the sort. Broken? Badly bent, maybe. Broken, in 1943? Not so much.

The opening of the western front in Europe in '44 was of immeasurable use to the Sovs. Why else were Stalin and Molotov screaming for it, at every opportunity? Because it helped take pressure off of the Soviet Army which hadn't quite built to the unstoppable juggernaut it was by the fall of '44.

Without it, there's every chance that the Eastern Front bogs down into an even nastier war of attrition then it was.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Brotherman
Without the us the nazis would have perfected the V series icbm and more then likely nuclear technology. The UK would have no idea what hit them. If I remember correctly i think Hitler believed the us would ally with him. I dont think the UK would have lasted very long without worldly allies not limited to the US.


The German nuclear program was a dud.

Apparently there designs didn't have a hope in hell of working.

P,us the UK knew exactly what there were trying to develop and used to target thete facilities.
edit on 30-3-2016 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok


As for Russia? I can see Hitler's reasoning. To some extent. He needed those resources or the UK could have starved Germany.

Exactly. It was the Axis, not the Allies, who started the war surrounded. Though Japan had a little room.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Brotherman




Without the us the nazis would have perfected the V series icbm and more then likely nuclear technology


You do relise that at the start of WW II The U.K. had the most advanced nuclear programme on the planet?

Or did you not know ?

Look up " Project Tube Alloys "
edit on 30-3-2016 by alldaylong because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: Ohanka


Securing the rail hubs of Western Europe was a much higher priority to the wartime Stavka than control of the road system.

How did they propose to deal with the inconvenience that Soviet rolling stock ran on 5' 6" gauge tracks and European railways are 4' 11 1/2" gauge?


Honestly i have no idea. I'll go digging through some old cold war manuals on the Soviet Army to find out.

Edit: turns out they didn't. They would merely transload when necessary. A fairly time consuming and manpower intensive process at the time.
edit on -050002pm3kpm by Ohanka because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: crazyewok

Not to split hairs... but I going to anyways...


American pilots assisted in that..and I am certain other nations had pilots assisting in that as well..

Other than that


We owe gratitude to the 3 U.S. pilots who fought at The Battle Of Britain


ever get tired of being wrong.. just curious you keep spouting "facts" in at least two threads that have something vaguely to do with americans that are just flat out wrong.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: crazyewok

Not to split hairs... but I going to anyways...


American pilots assisted in that..and I am certain other nations had pilots assisting in that as well..

Other than that


One squadron among hundreds.
Usefull yes
Brave yes
But not of life and death strategic value like the gilm pearl habour would have you think.

Though if you grouped the USA along with polish, candians, Australians and other foreign pilot's then you have a point in sayi g foreign volunteers played a big role.


Thats why I said other nations had pilots assisting as well, I made the comment off memory and didnt want to throw numbers out without being certain.
I honestly didnt know there were 564 pilots from other nations flying in the battle of Britain; that doesnt take anything away from the Brits in my opinion it just adds in that the victory was a team effort..

On a side note usually when I look like someone seriously beating the drum for America is because someone just disrespected the efforts and the men and women that died from my country.

as I said earlier even if we didnt come into the war, I have no doubt the UK would have held out and at worst had a white peace declared.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull


I've always kinda wondered what might have happened if the Germans had kept up their attacks on the RAF, and not gone stupid and begun to bomb London, Coventry, etc...? I've always been under the impression that the RAF was being worn to the nub...not necessarily equipment, but the pilots were being worn out.


But it never would have happened. Do you know why? Because the whole Nazi deal was about terrifying people into submission, not winning wars through strategy and tactics. Adolf and his chums wouldn't have been satisfied with knocking out planes. They wanted to kill people. Preferably by scaring them to death.


edit on 30/3/16 by Astyanax because: of wars!



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: crazyewok

Not to split hairs... but I going to anyways...


American pilots assisted in that..and I am certain other nations had pilots assisting in that as well..

Other than that


We owe gratitude to the 3 U.S. pilots who fought at The Battle Of Britain


ever get tired of being wrong.. just curious you keep spouting "facts" in at least two threads that have something vaguely to do with americans that are just flat out wrong.


Yes you are correct i was wrong. It was either 9 or 11

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

Exactly.

But it makes for interesting conversation...



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
Loads of threads decnd into this and not just on ATS. "we saved your arse in world war 2" is a hot contentious topic anywhere a American and a Brit come together


so ATS what do you say?





Sorry bud, but no USA, no Britain, no win
just simple mathematical reality.
now dont get me wrong. Britain, this dinky little island on the edge of the world was doing a job of holding off the krauts like a bunch of spartan warriors, but defense will inevitably wear down without backup.

England was a strong shield. America offered a spear (eventually) and russia..well hell, Russia yanked them up to expose their underbelly.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: SaturnFX

And the laws of physics say Germans cant walk across water.


Until you tell me how a Germany was meant to invade a island nation with 4 or 5 times its naval strength and stronger Airforce and far more resources to call from I will have to call BS

edit on 30-3-2016 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

The Germans may have taken out British Isles but it was never going to subdue the British Empire. Our government would have moved to Canada or Australia to carry on the fight. Just because Britain was over run, the rest of the massive Empire would have carried on at least the Dominions and taken it back to Germany when the time was right and the Huns were beaten by the Soviets.

Germany was a tiny country. Sure it had a relatively large population but the land mass was tiny in the big league of things compared to the British Empire, the USSR and the USA. It was never going to win, it was always going to lose against any of these powers. It had very small natural resources compared to the big three.

Germany could never produce enough weapons to fight any of the big three, it was always producing exceptionally small quantities of weapons compared to them.

The quality of German weaponry was total crap compared to the opposition. They couldn't produce a proper heavy bomber during the whole of WW2.
The German attempt at tank manufacture was laughing stock right up to the end when they began producing something decent and by then it was all too late and produced in joke quantities.

The quality of the German soldier was always questionable. Sure they beat the little countries in Europe using cruel offensive actions, but as soon as they came up against decent opposition in the big three they disintegrated. Britain would have taken out the Germans alone at some point, our Empire was the greatest the world has ever seen.

Germany might have won the war if it had not turned on its minorities, but through Nazi insane actions it managed to decapitate itself of its scientific elite who emigrated which led to nukes being created in the allied states and not in Germany.

The whole German military assault on Europe was sure to fail, it could never take on the Russians with their economic might and resources, popualtion, plus a belief in their political system which many Germans never honestly had when push came to shove.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

We didn't win. WWII continued after 1945 albeit without uniform and arms, the fight was taken over by the Banksters and by the early 70's the Common Market was coming into force (the start of a United Europe) now known as the European Union. By 2016 The European Union is largely controlled by Germany (does anyone else think Merkel looks a little familiar but blonde, looks almost like a clone!) and the French (who were handed their asses on a plate after the Polish) albeit from Brussels.

Vote out, lets take back our lil ol Island nation and decide our own destiny

Just Saying

CbG



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Umm dude... I suggest you go read some more if you think the quality of german soldiers were inferior to the allies...

They had some Top flight units that nobody wanted to go up against because they knew it was going to be a bloody mess.

I just finished Liberator by Alex Kershaw, covering the 45th infantry division from Sicily to Dachau, they encountered several elite german units slogging up through italy and in southern germany.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: SaturnFX

And the laws of physics say Germans cant walk across water.


Until you tell me how a Germany was meant to invade a island nation with 4 or 5 times its naval strength and stronger Airforce and far more resources to call from I will have to call BS

As the axis united all of europe, all heavy artillery would be moved to the west, keeping a steady relentless bombarding of england night and day, week after week, month after month, year after year. hell, they wouldn't even have to invade, they could simply bomb the entire British isles until a forced surrender, never losing a single troop if they chose to.

no matter how hard the turtle shell is, it will chip away and cave in eventually.

but lets say hitler wanted to take england by force anyhow.
sure, getting by the british navy would be difficult ship by ship, but you are forgetting something being developed to fuel the invasion force
the Voltswagon Schwimmwagen...a military amphibious car that could simply drive over water into england. built to house about 4 people imagine a hundred thousand little hardened boat cars swarming all over the coast, wave after wave, no possible way the combined fleets of all the allies navies could stop that, much less a single nations navy. simply impossible. that mixed with sky and coastal artillery...the 17 mile gap between the island and the coast wouldn't have been an issue at all.

Schwimmwagen
You're welcome
(not that I had anything to do with it, but my granddad accepts your gratitude
)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: SaturnFX




but you are forgetting something being developed to fuel the invasion force


Do you think Britains own scientists where just sitting back and not developing weapons of our own >

A few " Bouncing Bombs " would have blown that lot out of the water.







new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join