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.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Yeah genius, you were wrong, it was close to ninety...
...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
originally posted by: Raggedyman
So you have now changed your story, backtracked, decided to dump your silly I got it backwards argument
Courage there AM
Go build a new carrier
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.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: Raggedyman
So you have now changed your story, backtracked, decided to dump your silly I got it backwards argument
Courage there AM
Go build a new carrier
What am I backtracking? Sea Lion planning came before Barbarossa. The British far outpaced Germany in carrier production.
Any of that wrong Captain History?
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: Raggedyman
So you have now changed your story, backtracked, decided to dump your silly I got it backwards argument
Courage there AM
Go build a new carrier
What am I backtracking?
originally posted by: Raggedyman
No,atomic,programme was stared in the US till 42 genius
.
The Manhattan Project began modestly in 1939...
Briggs held a meeting on 21 October 1939, which was attended by Szilárd, Wigner and Edward Teller. The committee reported back to Roosevelt in November that uranium "would provide a possible source of bombs with a destructiveness vastly greater than anything now knownSource.
And it was lead,by Germans
Those overhyped Germans who understood atomic power before the allies.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
The Germans didn't want carriers, genius, that's why they didn't even bother to take their ships out of the harbors. Why Turpitz was sunk in a fjord
They were fighting land battles
Why build carriers, they built subs.
Who,cares anyway
I don't care about carriers,,they are irrelevant
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Yeah genius, you were wrong, it was close to ninety...
Says the guy who was comically unaware that they could have had 60.
...And most were being built after 43 and the war was over and isn't even relevant to if Germany was overhyped pre WW2
World War II ended in 1943? Interesting Mandela timeline you live in. Germany would not have been able to stand up to the naval might of the British with that amount of carriers. The British would have completely dominated the air, even without the United States being their militarily.
Great irrelevant argument
Says the guy who doesn't even know when the war ended, the Manhattan Project started or about the timeline for Sea Lion. I appreciate you giving me my daily dose of comedy.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Yeah it did mate, it ended at Stalingrad 43
The Brits were being smashed in North Africa
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: crazyewok
I don't disagree with you. But from a practical military perspective, they were absolutely not over-hyped. Their military power was incredible, in it's own way.
Could they sustain that military power? No. Could they project that military power much beyond their own neighborhood? Not really. But in the air, on land, and on sea, they were categorically a force to be reckoned with.
Up until they started running out of things like...y'know, gas.
originally posted by: crazyewok
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: crazyewok
Delayed 2-3 years?? Really? I will be polite here and label that 'best case scenario'. Worst case scenario? Never.
Too many variables here. Lend-Lease on steroids? Not at all as the U.S. is focused on Japan? Goering comes to his senses and returns to bombing airfields, ports and infrastructure instead of London? A huge increase of German air assets due to victory in the east?
I say again, anyone's guess.
Two to three years not because of anything the UK did but as Speer stated that the Chromium and Tungsten receives Germany had would be gone by 1947. That means no more tanks or artillery. It was actually a genuine and terrifying fear of his. 1947 and the German industry's would collapse. After that Russia or the UK could walk in.
Germany could not have survived a prolonged war, there economy was too fragile.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
I don't care about carriers,,they are irrelevant
originally posted by: crazyewok
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.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
So tell me genius,,if the Brits had it in hand, why was Churchill,begging the Yanksmto get involved, or didn't he in your timeline