Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Favorite Military Movies


Recommended Posts

Well, the Czechs had a well trained and equipped army with a strong defense along their northern border with Germany.  The German high command had some real concerns whether they could defeat them.  Instead, Chamberlain and France forced the Czechs to capitulate and give up almost half of their country without firing a shot.  What if Chamberlain had grown a pair and didn't give in to Hitler.  Maybe Hitler backs down and doesn't attack.  All of a sudden, he's not as bold with his moves and holds off for a few more years.  That extra time allows the Germans to develop more of their wonder weapons, so when the war does begin, they have an overwhelming arsenal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to see im not the only uber nerd/fanatic on that period of time.

Assuming we dont start the italian campaign, and the germans dont need to go there to hold us and the britts back, you havet to assume kursk turns out differently. As it was, the soviets lost far more people and equipmemt there. Had the germans had the extra divisions to exploit the kursk salient, the soviets could have recovered in time, but who knows what the germans could have done in the meantime.

Theres been a lot of people in recent times that downplay our involvement. On the one hand, i agree, the US was a very late entry. And the soviets killed far more of the whermacht than the western front ever did. But the US had the logistical nightmare of fighting on multiple fronts (vs one long one for the russians) as well as being a hquge supplier to the russians. As i said earlier, the nazis could have better used resources east had it not been for the britts and the holocaust. Well, if the russians had to spend steel and metal resources on transport (trucks, jeeps, trains) instead of using what we supplied, how much would that effect their ability to replace their war equipment losses?

What if what if what if.

Thats a cool little video

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going the other way, what if britain and france made good on their alliance with poland and attacked germany first?

In all honesty, had the germans been stoppe earlier, je world would look very different today. European borders woul be diferent. He US may still be second class to speak to the british empire and western europe may still have colonies throughout asia.

I think if the Brits & French had attacked Germany in the West (instead of the Sitzkrieg), the main effect is that it would have taken longer to conquer Poland, and the Germans would not have invaded Denmark or Norway prior to their invasion of France & the Low Countries. The Germans would have simply diverted resources to stop the Western Allies at the Siegfried Line, and once Poland was conquered, they would have just thrown everything against Britain & France (probably would have still gone thru Holland & Belgium to hit the Western Allies from behind). I think it just delays things and ends up costing the Brits & French more men & materiel.

 

Where the Brits & French should have and could have stopped Hitler was when he rearmed the Rhineland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if the Brits & French had attacked Germany in the West (instead of the Sitzkrieg), the main effect is that it would have taken longer to conquer Poland, and the Germans would not have invaded Denmark or Norway prior to their invasion of France & the Low Countries. The Germans would have simply diverted resources to stop the Western Allies at the Siegfried Line, and once Poland was conquered, they would have just thrown everything against Britain & France (probably would have still gone thru Holland & Belgium to hit the Western Allies from behind). I think it just delays things and ends up costing the Brits & French more men & materiel.

 

Where the Brits & French should have and could have stopped Hitler was when he rearmed the Rhineland.

The Brits and French started to go through a major accelerated re-armament program when they realized Hitler might attack Poland.  I don't believe they were capable and certainly not willing to go on the offensive when the Germans launched their attack on Poland.  They needed to buy time and they welcomed the Sitzkrieg.  In my opinion, the French were still fatigued from WWI and reluctantly went to war with Germany.

 

What also shocked them was the non-aggression pact Germany made with the Soviet Union.  They realized then that they were alone.

Edited by IEAngelsfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points. I think the majority of people werent really wanting to go back to war after WW1, especially if it was to come to the aid of abother country (like czech, poland etc). The germans had a head start because they were still pissed after WW1...i think most of their people were leary at first, but after hitler took the sudetenland without a shot, they got confidant. After taking poland with relative ease, and especially after dunkirk they probably felt pretty invincible.

And yes, having stalin and hitler seemingly end up on the same page im sure left the western allies very uneasy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it does. Then again, i think (and im not in any way a german appologist) that in time, the soviets would have attacked west. One thing people who today (at least those not old enough or not nerdy enough like me) probably dont understand is that ww2 wasnt just a war concerning nations, but one concerning ideals. It wasnt as much "germany vs russia" as it was facism vs communism, capitalism etc. I just dont think stalin and hitler could have been neighbors for too long before someone got drunk and walked next door to pick a fight so to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those of you (like me) who are:

 

A) Fascinated by the different tangents that WWII could have gone; and

 

2) Like to play computer games;

 

Might I suggest the Hearts of Iron series by Paradox Interactive? They've come out with 3 versions of Hearts of Iron, so far, the best one was HoI2. They'll be releasing the 4th one in the series later this year (it's been delayed), but it looks REALLY good. I have played all 3 versions (as well as most of the DLCs).

 

Here is a link to their forums with developer diaries for HoI IV.

 

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?forums/hearts-of-iron-iv.844/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...