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.

 

Nazi Germany, overhyped?

page: 5
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


Air supremacy was achieved in the Battle of Britain. Achieving the same supremacy over Europe is an entirely different kettle of fish.


Debilitating loses would be suffered, and were even with the U.S. support, that would very much be a toss-up, in my estimation, given Germany's 262s and more time to develop and produce them.


You could very well be right, however. I tend to be a little more wary about the outcome, is all.

edit on 8-7-2017 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: crazyewok
You accuse me of ignoring you source's but you are ignoring my sources!

I have provided numbers and the source yet you continue to ignore it.


Surprised? He's already been wrong about Sea Lion vis a vis Barbarossa.


You told me I had sea lion invasion backwards, how could I have it backwards if it didn't even happen?
How can an assumption of an attack that never happened be backwards, how can I guess something that wasn't real and be wrong when the premise is a guess

AM, operation sea lion never happened, do you understand that, because it never happened I can't have had the t backwards
Operation sea lion didn't happen, it's not a secret that Britain was not invaded by the Nazis,
The Nazis didn't invade Britain, ok?

better tighten those screws up. You seem a little off kilter there buddy



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Germany didn't need the sea, they had railways.


And what good are trains without airpower to protect them?



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: nwtrucker

I tend to think due to British air supremacy that reduction of German manufacturing capabilities would have pushed Hitler to come to terms for retaining parts, not all, of Europe. He was willing to pull back from France, I see him keeping most of Eastern Europe and parts of Asia.

The Germans just could not produce enough aircraft once the Battle of Britain was lost. The strategic blunder of having the Luftwaffe bomb London instead of British factories was another huge contributing factor in losing the war.

As Ewok said, Hitler was a retard.



The bombing of London.....all due to the 'accidental'....cough, cough, hawk, spit....bombing of Berlin..Sheer brilliance!



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What,,where building 60 aircraft carriers, really, really truly

Manhattan project was started mid 1942, Hitlers was 1939, they would have had it years earlier but allied bombing

But hey, Germany was overhyped
Stupid premise in my opinion



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Air supremacy was achieved in the Battle of Britain. Achieving the same supremacy over Europe is an entirely different kettle of fish.


After the Battle of Britain Germany's aircraft production never recovered. I do not think they would have been able to control European skies once the Royal Navy began utilizing their carrier aircraft in the European mainland which they could have accessed from both the North Sea and the Mediterranean.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Raggedyman
If Hitler didn't invade Russia (he did) then he would have invaded Britain ( he didn't because he invaded Russia)

So I can't get what didn't happen backwards, can't even get what didn't happen forwards either


Wrong. Hitler invaded Russia because he couldn't invade Britain.

Stick to your YouTube and leave the history to people who actually know it.


You need to read and then comprehend AM
Hitler invaded Russia because he couldn't invade Britain

My point was what if he didn't invade Russia,

Germany wasn't overhyped, they had poor leadership, a bit like your comprehension skills



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
You told me I had sea lion invasion backwards, how could I have it backwards if it didn't even happen?


Because you said this:


If Hitler didn't invade Russia, I think he would have invaded Britain.


Hitler invaded Russia because he could not invade Britain. Stop acting the fool.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Germany being unable to sustain a protracted war on multiple fronts is not the same thing as Germany being "a house of cards."

No, Germany was likely not going to win the war unless they were able to beat everybody else to The Bomb, but they sure kicked the # out of a lot of people and had a broad range of successes.

Hitler being able to capitalize on the feelings of the global community at the time, and those of German citizens, should not be conflated with Nazi Germany being a paper tiger.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
My point was what if he didn't invade Russia


He still wouldn't have invaded Britain because they gave up on that plan in 1940.

Before they invaded Russia.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
What,,where building 60 aircraft carriers, really, really truly


Yeah, genius, they were. Your lack of knowledge on the subject is embarrassing.

Unlike Hitler, the Allies knew the value of naval airpower which is why retard Hitler only had two under construction and never finished either.

As for their nuclear program, it never got out of its infancy.


ETA: I was wrong, it was close to 90.

Oh, and I just caught this bon mot:


Manhattan project was started mid 1942.


Uh, no, it didn't. It started in 1939.







edit on 8-7-2017 by AugustusMasonicus because: Armaments 2:9-21 And the people did feast upon the lambs, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies, and orangutans, and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats...



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Germany didn't need the sea, they had railways.


And what good are trains without airpower to protect them?


I don't think you fully comprehend this thread dear boy
We are discussing if Nazi Germany was over hyped, or in layman terms, not as dangerous as they were made out to be in world war 2

I think Nazi Germany was as dangerous as they were made out to be and it took a world war and many allied countries to stop them.
So catch up with the context please

So simply,,where the Nazis as bad as what the allies made them out to be or where they a pushover
Now remember, this pushover reich cost 80 million lives



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
I don't think you fully comprehend this thread dear boy


Says Captain YouTube who doesn't even know the timeline for Sea Lion.


We are discussing if Nazi Germany was over hyped...


They were overhyped, they couldn't have defeated Britain or Russia even without the United States participating in the European theater. They did not have the resources, military or personnel.




edit on 8-7-2017 by AugustusMasonicus because: I ♥ cheese pizza.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Try this
Slowly now

What IF, the word IF is the one that you should comprehend in relation to the context of the sentence
What IF the Nazis DIDNT invade Russia

It's called a hypothetical, that means, what IF

Do you get it, it's a bit of a game



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Hitler invaded Russia because he couldn't invade Britain



Wrong.

Russia and the east in General was ALWAYS Hitlers goals.

This was part of his mien Kampf. He started it time and time again in his private cabinet meetings that Russia and Bolchiviks where his enemy and had to be destroyed.

The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was a ruse to buy Germany time between invading Poland and preparing for the Invasion of Russia.

His soul aim was to bring the Germanic people in Poland , Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania under his protection, exterminate the Slavic people in these areas then move on into Russia settling it and using it for its resources.
That was the German Empire he dreamed of.

Britain in his option was a Aryan country and did not need conquering and cleaning and in fact he considered it a proof of Aryan superiority And France? He cared little about either away, he just needed them to pose no military threat to his ambitions in the east.
edit on 8-7-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
What IF the Nazis DIDNT invade Russia


They still wouldn't have invaded Britain because Hitler and his military did not feel it was viable which they discussed and determined in 1940.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Raggedyman
I don't think you fully comprehend this thread dear boy


Says Captain YouTube who doesn't even know the timeline for Sea Lion.


We are discussing if Nazi Germany was over hyped...


They were overhyped, they couldn't have defeated Britain or Russia even without the United States participating in the European theater. They did not have the resources, military or personnel.





That's an interesting opinion from a person who thinks operation sea lion, the invasion of Britain happened before the invasion of Russia

It didn't you know, Britain was never invaded but believe what you like.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Germany being unable to sustain a protracted war on multiple fronts is not the same thing as Germany being "a house of cards."

No, Germany was likely not going to win the war unless they were able to beat everybody else to The Bomb, but they sure kicked the # out of a lot of people and had a broad range of successes.

Hitler being able to capitalize on the feelings of the global community at the time, and those of German citizens, should not be conflated with Nazi Germany being a paper tiger.


Military wise they where not a paper tiger but politically and economically they where.

As soon as it became a battle of economy's they lost.

And long term survival? The NAZI Hierarchy meant that regime would have torn itself apart.

They entire ideology of National Socialism doomed it.
edit on 8-7-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
That's an interesting opinion from a person who thinks operation sea lion, the invasion of Britain happened before the invasion of Russia

It didn't you know, Britain was never invaded but believe what you like.


Nice try at backtracking. Your ability to understand World War II strategy is as pathetic as Hitler's.

Your goofy 'what if' scenario could never have taken place because the German high command already decided it could not take place.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Raggedyman
What,,where building 60 aircraft carriers, really, really truly


Yeah, genius, they were. Your lack of knowledge on the subject is embarrassing.

Unlike Hitler, the Allies knew the value of naval airpower which is why retard Hitler only had two under construction and never finished either.

As for their nuclear program, it never got out of its infancy.


ETA: I was wrong, it was close to 90.




Yeah genius, you were wrong, it was close to ninety, as if I thought you would know anything anyway
And most were being built after 43 and the war was over and isn't even relevant to if Germany was overhyped pre WW2

Great irrelevant argument




top topics



 
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join