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.

 

What would history be like if Nuclear bombs did not exist?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2020 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

Good for your body if not the soul, or so I'm told.


I've stopped smoking, generally coz it's too expensive, and there is not even an ounce of solid to be had in all the land.

Canny even blame Brexit nether just the Moroccans.

As to Shankly's take on the matter, i don't really have a clue, aside from 3 Championships and the UEFA Cup for Liverpool.




posted on Feb, 23 2020 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Bollocks to the body......been on medication, finishes Saturday, pub all day Sunday.

Gave up smoke years ago.
Once over it was quite regular, but then all of a sudden I became useless and would end up wankered and having a whitey in no time.

I have a high tolerance level for most things.....not that.



posted on Feb, 23 2020 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Scapegrace

Many forgot that a couple of US generals were planning to invade China and China was still aligned with Soviets after the war. Also the British will still be under alliance with the allies helping the USSR out. What if the US generals decided to invade China before they start another civil war or before it finishes?

Remember US had coloured war plans against the world. There was a plan to rearmed the Nazi's against Soviet Union.
edit on 23-2-2020 by makemap because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 01:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Scapegrace

I never even listed any sources you Muppet, left or right. x


And funnily enough, neither have you.

Anyhoo kind of gland the Soviets stopped, like any other sane person.

Ile give you a little hint all the same, the world is not, and never has been, as simple as right or left.
Well, whatever your sources were that led to your conclusions, they’re wrong.

I’m so tired of seeing the dubious claim that Russia was unbeatable in WWII. Russia had only a fraction of the industrial, technical, scientific and agricultural capacity of the United States. That’s an indisputable fact.

The USA was not only able to fight two full-scale wars simultaneously on the opposite sides of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, it had enough resources remaining to provide much of the food, fuel, munitions and vehicles of all our allies, including the Soviets. In the case of the Free French forces, virtually all of it.

I think the Soviets would have thrown the Western Allies back at first in a surprise attack in May 1945 after the Nazis surrendered. But relentless close air support of the allied ground forces, aerial interdiction of supply lines and strategic bombing by the heavies would have halted the Russians before they could threaten the North Sea ports our supplies came through.

By May 1945, the allies would have two of the largest capacity ports in the world to bring in even more materiel: Rotterdam and Hamburg. Yes, they would have required a huge effort to rehabilitate, but the Western Allies were expert at port rehab by then.

Those superb Soviet tanks and the superb trucks we gave them would soon be useless after their fuel ran out due to ceaseless aerial attack. The Red Army would have a hard time finding food in a devastated land, and no more rations would be provided by the United States.

In an emergency, ground-directed bombing could be used against the huge Soviet formations. USAAF units in Italy had developed a system by early 1945 in which an SC-284 radar tracked heavy bombers and sent a bomb release signal when they were over the target. Imagine what thousands of Flying Fortresses, Liberators and Lancasters could have unleashed on massed Soviet units.

It’s even possible that German POWs could have been pressed into service as riflemen in an emergency. There were hundreds of thousands of them in May 1945, and they would have been highly motivated to drive the Russians out of Germany. Riflemen always suffer the highest casualties among ground forces, and were usually in short supply. Even the Russians were feeling the pinch by war’s end.


edit on 24-2-2020 by Scapegrace because: Typos



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 02:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Scapegrace




The United States had the most powerful and capable navy and air forces in the world


The U.S. Navy only became the largest more or less at the end of WW II Before that The Royal Navy was the largest.




it remained the major naval power up until 1944-45 when it was overtaken by the American navy.


en.wikipedia.org...
The scenario we’re discussing takes place at the end of WWII, so what’s your point?

And you don’t seriously think the Royal Navy could have taken on the U.S. Navy by January 1944 and thereafter, do you? No naval historian in his or her right mind would make such a claim.

Here’s a link to the Wikipedia article re: fast carrier task forces. There was nothing else remotely like them in any other navy as the Japanese found out. Unbelievably powerful.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

For example, in December 1944, Task force 38 boasted 17 fleet carriers, 6 battleships, 13 cruisers, 58 destroyers and 1,100 high-performance aircraft. These were all war-built, high-speed, long-legged, state-of-the-art warships. No battle fleet on Earth could stand against Task Force 38 or Task Force 58.

The US Navy also perfected at-sea replenishment. It was able to completely refuel and resupply an entire FCTF at sea. IIRC, the Royal Navy didn’t have this capability until near the war’s end in the Pacific.

The Royal Navy did an incredible job in WWII; it was the master of ASW and convoy escort. That was only logical because Britain’s survival depended on getting the convoys through. The RN simply didn’t have the capacity to build enough merchant ships and escort ships and the kind of fast carrier task force the US Navy built.


edit on 24-2-2020 by Scapegrace because: Typo

edit on 24-2-2020 by Scapegrace because: Typos

edit on 24-2-2020 by Scapegrace because: Typo

edit on 24-2-2020 by Scapegrace because: Typo



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 06:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: makemap
a reply to: Scapegrace

Many forgot that a couple of US generals were planning to invade China and China was still aligned with Soviets after the war. Also the British will still be under alliance with the allies helping the USSR out. What if the US generals decided to invade China before they start another civil war or before it finishes?

Remember US had coloured war plans against the world. There was a plan to rearmed the Nazi's against Soviet Union.


many also forget something else. the fact that the leader of Britain, Churchill ALSO wanted to go after the Russians at the end of WW2 (not to mention at the end of WW1). not to mention that the Russians were nothing more than an ally of convenience (your enemy is my enemy, and thus you are a "friend"), and not a real ally. in fact i believe one of the reasons that they let the Russians take Berlin is because if they hadn't chances are there would have been war between the Russians and other allies. as wit was allied troops had to be rescued from the Russians. and we likely would have had the same problem if the Russians had been given the chance to "help" deal with Japan on their home soil.

and it was more the Americans that kept the British from going on after the Russians than anything else. and in all honesty even that was due more to war weariness than any love or respect for the Russians.



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Scapegrace

Well going by the way you think it would have gone down in a conventional manner, and the fact that America did indeed have a limited nuclear arsenal at the end of WW2, one has to wonder why we stopped at Germany and did not choose to steam roller all over the top of the Soviets since you seem to imagine we had that much of the upper hand in Europe.

Everybody was feeling the pinch by the end of the war, hence the reason it ended.

Which if you think about it is rather lucky, considering if you have any ancestors in said conflict they may not have been around to spawn your parents, hence you would not be here to be part of this discussion.



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: generik

originally posted by: makemap
a reply to: Scapegrace

Many forgot that a couple of US generals were planning to invade China and China was still aligned with Soviets after the war. Also the British will still be under alliance with the allies helping the USSR out. What if the US generals decided to invade China before they start another civil war or before it finishes?

Remember US had coloured war plans against the world. There was a plan to rearmed the Nazi's against Soviet Union.


many also forget something else. the fact that the leader of Britain, Churchill ALSO wanted to go after the Russians at the end of WW2 (not to mention at the end of WW1). not to mention that the Russians were nothing more than an ally of convenience (your enemy is my enemy, and thus you are a "friend"), and not a real ally. in fact i believe one of the reasons that they let the Russians take Berlin is because if they hadn't chances are there would have been war between the Russians and other allies. as wit was allied troops had to be rescued from the Russians. and we likely would have had the same problem if the Russians had been given the chance to "help" deal with Japan on their home soil.

and it was more the Americans that kept the British from going on after the Russians than anything else. and in all honesty even that was due more to war weariness than any love or respect for the Russians.
Patton allegedly wanted to drive the Soviets back to their pre-war boundaries. His reasoning was that the Western Allies would never have the kind of numbers and combat experience in Europe again to fight the Soviets. He thought we’d have to fight them sooner or later, so we might as well do it while we were at the height of our abilities and already there. If the Manhattan Project had failed or been significantly delayed, he might well have been right.



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Scapegrace

Well going by the way you think it would have gone down in a conventional manner, and the fact that America did indeed have a limited nuclear arsenal at the end of WW2, one has to wonder why we stopped at Germany and did not choose to steam roller all over the top of the Soviets since you seem to imagine we had that much of the upper hand in Europe.

Everybody was feeling the pinch by the end of the war, hence the reason it ended.

Which if you think about it is rather lucky, considering if you have any ancestors in said conflict they may not have been around to spawn your parents, hence you would not be here to be part of this discussion.
There was no enthusiasm by the public or political leadership for another all-out war. Almost everyone wanted to get the war with Japan over ASAP, bring the boys and girls home and start cranking out tract homes, cars, refrigerators and babies. The United States traditionally disarmed as rapidly as possible after its wars, and WWII was no exception. It wasn’t until the Cold War, beginning with the Korean “police action,” that we started maintaining huge armed forces at all times.



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Scapegrace

Which if you think about it is rather lucky, considering if you have any ancestors in said conflict they may not have been around to spawn your parents, hence you would not be here to be part of this discussion.
As a matter of fact, my father served in the ETO, including the Battle of the Bulge. He thought he was going to die on a number of occasions. You wouldn’t have the pleasure of debating me if he’d moved just a bit faster or slower at various times, or taken a different path or tarried a bit more somewhere.



posted on Feb, 24 2020 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Scapegrace

Well thumbs up to your daddy anyhoo, took the luck of the devil to come through that battle unscathed.


Respect where respect due.

Tell you one thing though, if they were ever to try and reenact the crazy fiasco, in this day of age, nobody would bother to turn up.

Considering we ken perfectly well who and what we would be fighting for aka the very same banker scum and corporations that sponsored both axis and allied sides during WW2.



posted on Feb, 25 2020 @ 12:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: makemap
Can't begin to guesstimate how many deaths but there sure as hell would have been more wars and subsequent casualties over the last 75 years than there has been.




posted on Feb, 25 2020 @ 01:00 AM
link   
They'd use twice as much agent orange, roundup, depl uranium.. Espec in chemtrail drops!



posted on Feb, 25 2020 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Scapegrace

Well thumbs up to your daddy anyhoo, took the luck of the devil to come through that battle unscathed.


Respect where respect due.

Tell you one thing though, if they were ever to try and reenact the crazy fiasco, in this day of age, nobody would bother to turn up.

Considering we ken perfectly well who and what we would be fighting for aka the very same banker scum and corporations that sponsored both axis and allied sides during WW2.
I pray to God we never go to war with Russia or China, especially Russia. It’s conceivable we could knock out most or all of China’s strategic nukes in a foolhardy surprise attack — at this point in time at least. But Russia can obliterate us any time it pleases, and there’s nothing we can do about it.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join