Technology save Nazi Germany?

I debated this on another site and it was hopeless since everyone on that site was an idiot!!

If you need information, go to this very good site

www.luft46.com

I really think that they could have won the war after I saw a well done History Channel documentary.

[Edited on 17-7-2003 by maynardsthirdeye]

They may have IF they have enough resorces, which they did not, the production capacity, which they did not, also they may have won if they did not have some crazy man like Hitler running things. As you can see evil has its flaws, there have been attempts by bad people to cause trouble, but it has never worked, because evil does not work, when ever there is evil there is some crazy stupid monster behind it. Take for example Saddam, North Korea leader, etc. Evil does not work, never has, never will.

Originally posted by jetsetter
They may have IF they have enough resorces, which they did not, the production capacity, which they did not, also they may have won if they did not have some crazy man like Hitler running things. As you can see evil has its flaws, there have been attempts by bad people to cause trouble, but it has never worked, because evil does not work, when ever there is evil there is some crazy stupid monster behind it. Take for example Saddam, North Korea leader, etc. Evil does not work, never has, never will.

What about Joseph Stalin? Killed many millions and died in his bed.

The advanced technology of the German aircraft industry at the end of World War II has become quite an urban legend in the last few years. Indeed there were a myriad of paper projects of aircraft of advanced design. What people tend to forget is that a vast expanse of engineering is required to turn paper into metal. Most of these projects would have required a minimum of two to three years of development before even a prototype aircraft would have been ready for testing. There is a big jump from the initial paper design to an actual flying prototype and often what appears workable on paper proves totally untenable when the actual design is tested. As an example study the history of the Rockwell XFV-12A. The point was the USA had the war winning weapon, the atomic bomb. In spite of all the "scare stories", the German work in this area was pitiful and again there was years of development before any such weapon would have been available to the Nazis. Also most tend to forget that advance aircraft were on the drawing boards at North American Aviation, Lockheed, and Boeing also. Advanced thinking was not the sole property of German engineers. What lost the war for Hitler was not any lack of weapons or military strategy and no reachable technological development on the part of German industry could have won the war for Germany. What lost the war for the Germans was the policy of "Slavs are slaves" which turned the Soviets (i. e., Russians) into implacable enemies who were going to win the war against the Germans at any cost.

But your forgetting that if the Nazi's had control of the air, no plane would pass over Germany. They were mostly working on bomber killers. Anyway, I'm saying if the war lasted into 1946.

You expectations of the Germans to have been able to control their air space is misplaced. At best, they might have been able to get day bomber combat looses to around 10% per mission. Do not forget that long range fighters (P-47, P-51, Hawker Tempest) were flying over Germany every day by late 1944. Also the British Mosquito bomber still was a problem even with the German jets. (You must understand the "interceptor problem" - that is fast flying aircraft such as P-47's and Mosquitoes are very difficult to intercept.) Even with the jets, the Germans could not have been able to keep aircraft from penetrating their air space. The truth is that most of the German aircraft projects were just paper and could never have been made into workable aircraft even if there was time for it.

I did forget a couple evil leaders. Stalin, Chinese leader(Years ago). There are many others.

This is just my honest opinion maynard.

I think that if the Germans could have invented the A-bomb, for which they had a program for, then perhaps things may have been different. I don't think they would have won the war but I do think they would have brought the allies to the table and negotiated a 'draw', so to speak. The shear weight (ie: numbers) were against the Nazis. The Nazis in no fashion could out produce the allies nor could they make up for the losses of well trained pilots, etc.

If they could have built a few A-bombs, they could have at most brought the war to a 'draw'...but then they would still exist today as a nation/ideology, perhaps. This is the only way I see German 'Technology' winning. I agree, their technology was amazing but it was being caught up to on a relative quick basis by the allies. In such, their hope rested in developing a viable and realistic A-bomb program and as with Hitlers case, the example of that fact would have been the likely destruction of London or a major Russian city....bet on it.

regards
seekerof

[Edited on 17-7-2003 by Seekerof]

[Edited on 17-7-2003 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by jagdflieger
You expectations of the Germans to have been able to control their air space is misplaced. At best, they might have been able to get day bomber combat looses to around 10% per mission. Do not forget that long range fighters (P-47, P-51, Hawker Tempest) were flying over Germany every day by late 1944. Also the British Mosquito bomber still was a problem even with the German jets. (You must understand the "interceptor problem" - that is fast flying aircraft such as P-47's and Mosquitoes are very difficult to intercept.) Even with the jets, the Germans could not have been able to keep aircraft from penetrating their air space. The truth is that most of the German aircraft projects were just paper and could never have been made into workable aircraft even if there was time for it.

But as I mentioned earlier, if the war had
lasted into 1946 they could have had their underground factories and synthetic fuel plants running.

[Edited on 20-7-2003 by maynardsthirdeye]

The ony reason Germany lost the war was because the leadership was badly misguided by secret societies.

The greatest factor that contributed to the demise of the Third Reich was the IDIOTIC leadership if Hitler. Ever wonder why the Allies never tried to kill him or have him assassinated? Don't. Hitler was the Allies greatest asset in defeating Germany.

Hitler was not a military leader or great tactician. He lost WWII because:

1. He always underestimated his enemies will to fight.

2. He became drunk on his own early (easy) victories.

3. He personally lost the Battle of Britain, by ordering Goering to switch bombing targets from RAF assets to London.

4. He declared war on America for no good reason other than he signed a treaty with Japan (1st biggest mistake).

5. Never finished off England, although it was within his capabilities.

6. Invaded Russia before he defeated Britain, thus opening a 2-front war in Europe (2nd biggest mistake).

7. Because he dreamed of a blue water navy like the Royal Navy, he wasted valuable materials and resources building warships doomed to be hunted down and sunk like a fox at a foxhunt. Steel that could have been used to build hundreds of Panther tanks and U-boats.

8. Never took the Russians seriously, had no long-term military strategy. Dismissed Russian manufacturing capabilities beyond the Urals as a fantasy. Refused Goerings requests to build bombers with sufficient range to hit Russian factories in the Urals and Siberia.

9. Needlessly adventured in North Africa and Crete, areas with questionable military value. Should have concentrated on Egypt and the Suez canal.

10. Wasted tremendous assets and materials in the attempt to liquidate the Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, etc. Men and weapons that could have been at the front. Often place supply and infrastructure priority on the extermination of jews OVER tactical and strategic requirements of his general staff.

11. Distrusted his own military. Saw Generals as Prussian relics of the old Imperial way. Did nothing to endear himself to his own armies. Constantly fired brilliant tacticians and leaders because they could not or would not follow his strategies and orders. Sacraficed an ENTIRE army of 20K men at Stalingrad because he was too proud to order them to retreat.

12. Misued brilliant German technical innovations, such as V weapons and jet aircraft. Insisted ME-262 be outfitted as a ground strike aircraft for 1.5 years, delaying its possible impact on US daytime air raids. Placed too much resources on V-1 and V-2, which had no tactical value and very limited propaganda value.

The list goes on and on........

All I can say is that I am really glad that someone didnt shoot Hitler in 1942, or even early 1943, or we would have been SCREWED.

Can you imagine what Germany would had become/accomplished if Hitler and the Nazis were purged in 1942, only to be replaced by The General Staff, led by Rommel, Guderian, Doenitz, and Galland? A cease-fire with the US and UK for 6 months to regroup, settle with Allies and withdraw from France and Low Coutries....and then finish of the USSR?

Hitler was our greatest asset in WWII.



[Edited on 17-7-2003 by Pyros]

I also remember something about a ban on jet and rocket technology back in the 1930's. What could have happened if they had jets during the Battle of Britain?

Who said Germany lost the war, if anything, they lost the battle, but here we are again with Germany an industrial power again, and legends of Argentinian-German/Italians who believe willfully that the fight is not over.

Hmm, makes you think of what is in Antartica.

[Edited on 7/18/2003 by FoxStriker]

The Germans lost World War 2 for the same reason Custer lost the Battle of the Little Big Horn - too many f**king indians except in Hitler's case - too many f**king Russians. Basically you had a country the size of Oregon and the population of California and New York taking on the entire world. As far as the "gadget", the Germans were 5 to 10 years away from it. Another thing that people tend to forget, after the war against Japan would be finished, the USA would have the entire strengh of the US Navy to throw into the battle. Had the war against the Germans lasted into 1946, the US Navy could have placed at least 20 aircraft carriers in the North Sea for operations against German targets.

Originally posted by jagdflieger
The Germans lost World War 2 for the same reason Custer lost the Battle of the Little Big Horn - too many f**king indians except in Hitler's case - too many f**king Russians. Basically you had a country the size of Oregon and the population of California and New York taking on the entire world. As far as the "gadget", the Germans were 5 to 10 years away from it. Another thing that people tend to forget, after the war against Japan would be finished, the USA would have the entire strengh of the US Navy to throw into the battle. Had the war against the Germans lasted into 1946, the US Navy could have placed at least 20 aircraft carriers in the North Sea for operations against German targets.

But they could have had air superiority by then and the atomic bomb.

About Germany controling the skies.. They pretty much did but it was a war of numbers, Simply put, we threw more bombers in the skies of Germany than they could shoot down. They had the U.S. industrial machine against them.

Originally posted by ThermoNuke
About Germany controling the skies.. They pretty much did but it was a war of numbers, Simply put, we threw more bombers in the skies of Germany than they could shoot down. They had the U.S. industrial machine against them.

But if the war had lasted into 1946, the Germans would be bombing the United States and Russian factories behind the Urals. It would have been a longshot but I could have happened.

11. Distrusted his own military. Saw Generals as Prussian relics of the old Imperial way. Did nothing to endear himself to his own armies. Constantly fired brilliant tacticians and leaders because they could not or would not follow his strategies and orders. Sacraficed an ENTIRE army of 20K men at Stalingrad because he was too proud to order them to retreat.

i agree with all your points but just to clarify, i thought he had like 200k and the ruskies led them into captivity in Siberia and something like 9,000 came back

or maybe it was different

Even though Germany had all these plans on the drawing boards for aircraft, etc. Had nearly completed thier formula for a type of advanced form of speed (that had a little coc aine in it) that would keep you awake and full of energy for days on end to give the nazi's troops better morale.

They still lacked the man power in the end.

NAzi Germany spread across Europe and warred many countries. The Nazi's only had a limited population to get troops from. While the countries they warred...had many.

Jetsetter>


They may have IF they have enough resorces, which they did not, the production capacity, which they did not, also they may have won if they did not have some crazy man like Hitler running things. As you can see evil has its flaws, there have been attempts by bad people to cause trouble, but it has never worked, because evil does not work, when ever there is evil there is some crazy stupid monster behind it. Take for example Saddam, North Korea leader, etc. Evil does not work, never has, never will.

Depends on what you consider evil or good.
Many successful rulers and empires in the past may not
exactly have been ethical or humane.
Look at the Roman Empire, a very undemocratic institution complete with despotic emperors ,slavery and
the killing of human beings as entertainment in the arenas.
Some could have considered them an evil empire.
Evil or not they conquered a lot of territory and for awhile
were the number one superpower of their day.

Look at the mongols under Genghis Khan.
Look how many cities they razed to the ground and civilians they butchered along with the many they enslaved.
But they founded an a huge empire that was probably bigger than the Romans.
Evil or not he succeeded where lesser men failed.

In history the strong and the powerful are successful.
It helps to have some commonsense and intelleigence
along with superior weapons and larger armies.
Unfortunately it has nothing to do with ethics or morals.
Even evil people can rule successfully and at the expense
of others.

If Hitler failed that was his own stupidity or incompetence. Not his lack of morals or ethics.
(It was just plain dumb luck for the rest of us that this man was such an idiot. Otherwise he would have lasted
longer and caused more harm.)

Stalin was actually a more successful dictator or statesman in comparison.
That's because he was smarter, more cunning and more competent.
Therefore he lasted longer.
Look at Mao he ruled for over twenty years,Castro for over forty and Kim-il-sung (father of kim-jong-il) ruledNorth Korea for
oever forty yrs.
But of course one has to decide whether these men were evil or not. That may be more a matter of one's political bias than anything.