On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:29:35 +0000, Therion Ware
<autodelete@city-of-dis.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following

Arguably the Germans lost the initiative as regards the war in the
East there, though Stalingrad didn't help much, either. Though if you
really want to go for it, the beginning of the end was when Hitler
didn't follow up on the British withdrawal from France though *that*
said, the Royal Navy might have been able to defeat an invasion albeit
at horrible cost.

A German invasion of Great Britain wasn't realistic. Germany lacked
the sealift capability to move heavy equipment across the Channel.
Jodl ordered Sealion prepared as a contingency only.

Therion Ware wrote:

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:15:50 -0500 in alt.atheism, Mary Hogan ("Mary

When was the turn around?

Kursk?

The Polish border, 1939. Germany was doomed as soon
as it turned into a shooting war, the only question was
how long and how many dead before it was over.

Arguably the Germans lost the initiative as regards the war in the
East there, though Stalingrad didn't help much, either. Though if you
really want to go for it, the beginning of the end was when Hitler
didn't follow up on the British withdrawal from France though *that*
said, the Royal Navy might have been able to defeat an invasion

albeit

at horrible cost.

Germany had no chance at pulling off the invasion of
England. Had they built enough of their newer submarines
they *might* have had a chance at forcing England to
come to terms, but an amphibious assault across the
channel in the face of the Royal Navy, RAF and shore
defenses? The company or two they had the transport
capability to land would die before they ran out of
bullets, which would be handy because there'd be no
way for the Germans to get them any more ammo.

Then again, Germany declaring war on the US in the
wake of Pearl Harbour wasn't a terribly good move either.

The US and Germany were effectively already at war,
at least in the Battle of the Atlantic. Germany's
declaration just formalized the then-current state
of affairs...though it *did* give some political
advantages to FDR.

Which is to say there were *lots* of "turning points" and hence lots
of possible "what ifs": if Germany hadn't declared war on the USSR
would the D Day landings have been successful? And so on. Would the

US

have gone on the develop the A bomb and taken Europe at its leisure?

I think that, while noone can deny the USSR's payments
in blood during WW2, the US logistical contribution
to the Soviet Union's war effort cannot be denied.
Large portions of the soviet army's supply system were
run entirely on US-built trucks and locomotives,
and that's a small part of what was sent.

Not that I'm denigrating what the Soviets did accomplish,
their tanks and some of their aircraft were amazing. How
does that quote go..."Tell a Russian to design a shoe,
and he'll build something that resembles the box it
comes in; tell him to design something to kill Germans,
and he turns into Thomas f**king Edison."

Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet

Therion Ware wrote:

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 08:15:50 -0500 in alt.atheism, Mary Hogan ("Mary

When was the turn around?

Kursk?

The Polish border, 1939. Germany was doomed as soon
as it turned into a shooting war, the only question was
how long and how many dead before it was over.

Arguably the Germans lost the initiative as regards the war in the
East there, though Stalingrad didn't help much, either. Though if you
really want to go for it, the beginning of the end was when Hitler
didn't follow up on the British withdrawal from France though *that*
said, the Royal Navy might have been able to defeat an invasion albeit
at horrible cost.

Germany had no chance at pulling off the invasion of
England. Had they built enough of their newer submarines
they *might* have had a chance at forcing England to
come to terms, but an amphibious assault across the
channel in the face of the Royal Navy, RAF and shore
defenses? The company or two they had the transport
capability to land would die before they ran out of
bullets, which would be handy because there'd be no
way for the Germans to get them any more ammo.

Then again, Germany declaring war on the US in the
wake of Pearl Harbour wasn't a terribly good move either.

The US and Germany were effectively already at war,
at least in the Battle of the Atlantic.

Germany's
declaration just formalized the then-current state
of affairs...though it *did* give some political
advantages to FDR.

Which is to say there were *lots* of "turning points" and hence lots
of possible "what ifs": if Germany hadn't declared war on the USSR
would the D Day landings have been successful? And so on. Would the US
have gone on the develop the A bomb and taken Europe at its leisure?

I think that, while noone can deny the USSR's payments
in blood during WW2, the US logistical contribution
to the Soviet Union's war effort cannot be denied.

Large portions of the soviet army's supply system were
run entirely on US-built trucks and locomotives,
and that's a small part of what was sent.

Not that I'm denigrating what the Soviets did accomplish,
their tanks and some of their aircraft were amazing. How
does that quote go..."Tell a Russian to design a shoe,
and he'll build something that resembles the box it
comes in; tell him to design something to kill Germans,
and he turns into Thomas f**king Edison."