ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags World War II history

Reply
Old 15th May 2019, 09:09 AM   #2161
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,960
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Chamberlain was quoted as saying it would have been far worse in 1938. I reckon Hitler would have gone through the Ardennes then.
Ah yes, through the Ardennes, that classic route that all the sucessful invasions of the British Isles in the last 950 years have taken.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 09:12 AM   #2162
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,019
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Chamberlain was quoted as saying it would have been far worse in 1938. I reckon Hitler would have gone through the Ardennes then. There is a sensible posting about the matter at this forum:

https://www.quora.com/What-if-Hitler...-early-as-1938
Did you read any of the other replies, Henri? Like the ones that point out how small and skeletal the German forces are?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 09:51 AM   #2163
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,566
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Did you read any of the other replies, Henri? Like the ones that point out how small and skeletal the German forces are?
I just think that's an astonishing lack of vision as well as showing a sense of humour is not your strong point:

https://spartacus-educational.com/2WWgermanA.htm

Quote:
Stephen Roberts, The House that Hitler Built (1938)

There is no doubt that Germany has the largest army outside Russia. When completely organized, her thirty-six infantry divisions alone will include 600,000 men. Britain has just over 150,000 men, in five divisions. France has a peace-time army of twenty-five divisions at home. No reasonable observer can doubt that, if Hitler organizes his thirty-six divisions and trains 300,000 conscripts a year, in a few years he will have the finest army in Europe.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 15th May 2019 at 10:04 AM.
Henri McPhee is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 01:06 PM   #2164
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,960
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I just think that's an astonishing lack of vision as well as showing a sense of humour is not your strong point:
Whereas your strong points clearly don't include understanding the meaning of the phrase "in a few years".

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 03:11 PM   #2165
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,310
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Ah yes, through the Ardennes, that classic route that all the sucessful invasions of the British Isles in the last 950 years have taken.

Dave
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 02:43 AM   #2166
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,566
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Whereas your strong points clearly don't include understanding the meaning of the phrase "in a few years".

Dave
I just think there is amazing complacency in thinking that Britain could not possibly have been invaded in 1938 with no Spitfires, and there is practically no discussion that Soviet Russia might have been defeated in a Nazi invasion. It would have been a military disaster and not good news for the Jews. I remember overhearing some gossip in a shop by an old man once who was around at the time saying it was touch and go and I consider that to be the pure unadulterated historical truth.
Henri McPhee is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 03:17 AM   #2167
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,538
And we're back to throwing completely disconnected stuff at the page, in the hopes something might stick.

No sense of timescales, or anything.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 03:27 AM   #2168
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,960
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I just think there is amazing complacency in thinking that Britain could not possibly have been invaded in 1938 with no Spitfires, and there is practically no discussion that Soviet Russia might have been defeated in a Nazi invasion. It would have been a military disaster and not good news for the Jews. I remember overhearing some gossip in a shop by an old man once who was around at the time saying it was touch and go and I consider that to be the pure unadulterated historical truth.
Careful now, the mask is slipping a bit.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 09:14 AM   #2169
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,566
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
And we're back to throwing completely disconnected stuff at the page, in the hopes something might stick.

No sense of timescales, or anything.
It's what is known technically as the pure unadulterated historical truth. This is an interesting opinion about the matter from another forum. It's never discussed in TV documentaries, or in the British and American media, or by historians, but it makes sense to me:

https://www.quora.com/If-Russia-woul...outcome-of-ww2

Quote:
"If Russia would have been defeated in 1941 then what would have been the outcome of ww2?"

If the USSR was completely defeated German troops would have occupied Siberia! My first thought is that there might not have been a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor! Japanese would have access to all of the oil and raw materials they could ask for! Japan may have defeated China. Without the Red army Germany may have defeated Britain! The British Empire without the British isles or would Germany take over the Empire?

Would the Axis powers been satisfied? It would have taken them many years to consolidate that victory!

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th May 2019 at 09:18 AM.
Henri McPhee is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 09:24 AM   #2170
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,960
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's what is known technically as the pure unadulterated historical truth.
No, any statement about what might have happened if everything had been different is what is known technically as pure unadulterated ******** guesswork.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 10:12 AM   #2171
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,559
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Chamberlain was quoted as saying it would have been far worse in 1938.

[citation needed]

Further, Chamberlain couldn't possibly have been the least bit biased about that, could he?

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I reckon Hitler would have gone through the Ardennes then.

Then explain, in detail, how the Wehrmacht was going to pull this off with far weaker panzer and motorized forces, a much weaker Luftwaffe (including only about half as many Ju 87s), and many fewer infantry divisions. Additionally, the 22. Luftlande-Division (22nd Air Landing Division), which was crucial in establishing a bridgehead across the Albert Canal, was still a regular infantry division in 1939.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a sensible posting about the matter at this forum:

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post

First, the author, who admits to not being an expert, postulates a German attack on Poland in 1938. That's not the scenario we're discussing.

Second, the author assumes that Stalin would have concluded a pact with Hitler if Chamberlain hadn't sold out Czechoslovakia , a wholly unsupportable assumption.

Third, the author makes the same handwaving assumption as you, that an attack through the Ardennes in 1939 would have succeeded just as it did in 1940. Fail.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya

Last edited by SpitfireIX; 16th May 2019 at 10:14 AM.
SpitfireIX is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 11:25 AM   #2172
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,310
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
Additionally, the 22. Luftlande-Division (22nd Air Landing Division), which was crucial in establishing a bridgehead across the Albert Canal
No it wasn't.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 11:43 AM   #2173
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,559
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
No it wasn't.

You're right ; it was paratroopers in gliders from the 7. Flieger-Division (later 1. Fallschirm-Jäger-Division) that captured Eben-Emael. The balance of the airborne forces were used mainly in an unsuccessful and costly attempt to capture the Dutch government and royal family.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 11:49 AM   #2174
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,310
Even then they weren't essential to the offensive, they were an added bonus and showing off, they caused concern for defenders of the UK after Dunkirk and also inspired the British and Americans to develop their own airborne infantry.

Last edited by Captain_Swoop; 16th May 2019 at 11:50 AM.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 01:43 PM   #2175
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,019
Correct my history, but didn’t the ‘Go through the Ardenne’ get made in desperation after the initial plans fell into Allied hands? You want to plan on that happening exactly 1 year earlier?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 01:48 PM   #2176
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 43,789
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Correct my history, but didn’t the ‘Go through the Ardenne’ get made in desperation after the initial plans fell into Allied hands? You want to plan on that happening exactly 1 year earlier?
There is a lot of debate about how much the German plans falling into allied hands had on the decision to go through the Ardennes in 1940.
Problem was the Allies were expecting the German offensive to take place where it was planned before the plans fell into Allied hands,and the Germans knew this.
A number of the German planners opposed the initial plan as being too orvious and one the Allies would expect. The plans falling into the allied hands might have strenthend their hands, but exactly how much impact it had on the decision to swtich the main offensive force to the Ardennes remains a matter of debate.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 03:02 PM   #2177
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 34,031
In terms of making an optimal plan, and allocating forces only where you know they'll actually be needed. There's probably a difference between "this is probably what they're going to do" and "this is exactly what they're going to do, in specific detail, including the non-obvious adaptations that will leave us vulnerable if we only expect the obvious."
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 04:03 PM   #2178
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 20,310
Committing the major part of your forces as a diversionary attack is a very bold plan though.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:25 PM   #2179
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,854
Ah so we are have yet another fringe reset and is Henri throwing all the same arguments at you again?
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 01:25 AM   #2180
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,538
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It's never discussed in TV documentaries, or in the British and American media, or by historians, but it makes sense to me:

https://www.quora.com/If-Russia-woul...outcome-of-ww2
There's a reason it's never discussed.
Because it's bollocks.
The Germans had no plan to go beyond the Urals...there was nothing there they wanted.

Stiil, up to your usual quality of reference material.

Originally Posted by Hans View Post
Ah so we are have yet another fringe reset and is Henri throwing all the same arguments at you again?
Pretty much.
I think I've spotted a 10-14 day cycle.
Henri posts nonsense - a day or 2 of chatter - goes quiet - 10 days later Henri posts nonsense again - repeat ad infinitum.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 02:52 AM   #2181
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,566
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
[citation needed]

Further, Chamberlain couldn't possibly have been the least bit biased about that, could he?
I think that quote saying Chamberlain once said it would have been worse in 1938 came from the David Dutton biography of Chamberlain in 2001 which I once read from the public library. The quote does not seem to be on the internet. There is an intelligent forum on the internet about all this. This is one of the more amusing postings:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/histo...-10-print.html

Quote:
Are you serious? You've done nothing but post unsubstantiated statements with little to no actual data backing them up, just random statistics and quotes that don't even fully embrace your argument.

You have failed repeatedly to justify your claim that the allies in 1938 could've taken Nazi Germany. The very same arguments you used to say the Czechs would've held their own are the same ones that could've been said for France in 1940.

Quote:

Relatively speaking they were in better shape than they were in 1939.

With the non-mechanized army, no RADAR system, only a handful of modern planes? Yeah, Britain was ready to kick ass in 1938. Give me a break.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 17th May 2019 at 02:54 AM.
Henri McPhee is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 05:37 AM   #2182
Dabop
Muse
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 866
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I think that quote saying Chamberlain once said it would have been worse in 1938 came from the David Dutton biography of Chamberlain in 2001 which I once read from the public library. The quote does not seem to be on the internet.
We have all seen how accurate your 'quotes' are, so excuse me if I believe it is as accurate as saying the sun rises in the west and sets in the north...
Basically- WE DON'T BELIEVE YOU...

__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader

'When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.' George Carlin
Dabop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 08:08 AM   #2183
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,102
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
There's a reason it's never discussed.
Because it's bollocks.
The Germans had no plan to go beyond the Urals...there was nothing there they wanted.
That is an understatement. They really had no plan to go TO the Urals either. Halder's plan was to advance to a purely arbitrary straight line on the map, from Arkhangelsk to the NE "tip" of the Black Sea. The line wasn't defined by any rivers, mountains or really any geographic features, and wouldn't pin the Soviets against anything (like the encirclement of the allied forces in France was against the sea.) Exactly why he thought the Russians would capitulate if he advances to that line and takes Moskow is not very clear to any historians or generals, as far as I know.

Also, there was no way the German logistics could have allowed them to go all the way to the Urals, really.

Nor would have their fuel reserves. As told to Halder by Hitler himself, they had fuel for 4 months starting the instant they declare war and the USSR stops selling them fuel. Which was remarkably accurate, actually. If you count from mid June, you have July, August, September, October... and, uh, big surprise, they bog down in October.

Exactly on what fuel or transport capacity they'd keep going all the way to the Urals is never explained in such fantasy alt-history scenarios.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 08:17 AM   #2184
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,102
Also -- much as I caught some flak myself for defending Chamberlain -- let me reiterate my previous point that in 1938 the German army was not yet the formidable army from 1940. Organisation and doctrine wise, a lot had changed in that time.

Because German doctrines and organization didn't START in their final form. Germany had learned the first lessons in Spain, and adapted its doctrines a lot there, but the final lessons came in Poland. After Poland, Germany did a lot of revision and restructuring. E.g., it turned out in Poland that they didn't have nearly enough infantry to support the tanks in a tank division, and the appropriate reorganization ensued at the end of '39.

Really, the big advantage it had over the French and British in '40 was that Germany had had these lessons and took them to heart, while the French and British had not personally had them and largely ignored them when they happened to someone else. Well, the French generals actually were the most inclined to study what happened elsewhere, but they were distrusted by their own politicians, so the impact was minimise. The British mostly went with "not invented here" until it bit them in the ass in Africa. I mean, not even the bite in the ass in France was enough.

But this isn't about the British, it's about the Germans. The biggest advantage Germany had was the reorganization and doctrine revision after Poland.

Start a war with France and the UK in 1938, BEFORE Poland, and that advantage on the German side disappears.

Basically it's not JUST about the number of divisions, or number of airplanes, etc. It's also how you use it. And in '38 Germany hadn't yet learned how to use them well.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 01:02 PM   #2185
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,559
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I just think there is amazing complacency in thinking that Britain could not possibly have been invaded in 1938 . . .

Then explain, in detail, how Germany was going to invade Britain in the fall of 1938. Specifically:

What troops were going to be used? (Remember, the Wehrmacht also has to fight Czechoslovakia, and guard against any potential French incursions.)

Where was this force going to embark? (The nearest German port is Emden, which is about 220 nautical miles by water from Norfolk, the nearest part of England. But it's unlikely that more than one or two divisions could have embarked from there.)

What sort of transportation was going to be used? How long would it have taken to assemble? (See the Wikipedia article on Operation Sea LionWP for some ideas.)

How were the Germans going to stop the RN and the RAF from destroying the landing force en route?

How was the landing force going to be supplied? (See my previous comments about logistics.)

How were the Germans going to cope with the autumn weather in the North Sea?

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
. . . with no Spitfires . . .

Exactly what aircraft did the Luftwaffe have in service in 1938 that the Hurricane couldn't handle??

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
. . . and there is practically no discussion that Soviet Russia might have been defeated in a Nazi invasion.

First of all, as has been discussed, there was no chance that Germany could have conquered the Soviet Union. It was simply impossible for logistical, economic, and geographic reasons. The best the Nazis could have hoped for would have been to have conquered enough territory to convince Stalin to have concluded a peace treaty that let Hitler keep some of his ill-gotten gains, such as Ukraine.

Second, how would starting the war in 1938 have made things any harder for the Soviets?

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It would have been a military disaster and not good news for the Jews. I remember overhearing some gossip in a shop by an old man once who was around at the time saying it was touch and go and I consider that to be the pure unadulterated historical truth.

Again, exactly how is this relevant to the discussion of appeasement? And as for the hilited, this is frankly a silly comment, and no one cares about your opinion anyway, for reasons that have been thoroughly discussed upthread.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 01:28 PM   #2186
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,687
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is an intelligent forum on the internet about all this. This is one of the more amusing postings:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/histo...-10-print.html
You found someone else as clueless as about the reality of the balance of forces in 1938, congratulations. Now perhaps you could offer some evidence to support the claims you and your soulmate make?
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2019, 12:18 PM   #2187
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,758
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I think that quote saying Chamberlain once said it would have been worse in 1938 came from the David Dutton biography of Chamberlain in 2001 which I once read from the public library. The quote does not seem to be on the internet. There is an intelligent forum on the internet about all this. This is one of the more amusing postings:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/histo...-10-print.html
Why are you posting total idocies?
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2019, 12:26 PM   #2188
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,536
Klimax, do you really need to ask that?
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2019, 04:09 PM   #2189
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
That is an understatement. They really had no plan to go TO the Urals either. Halder's plan was to advance to a purely arbitrary straight line on the map, from Arkhangelsk to the NE "tip" of the Black Sea. The line wasn't defined by any rivers, mountains or really any geographic features, and wouldn't pin the Soviets against anything (like the encirclement of the allied forces in France was against the sea.) Exactly why he thought the Russians would capitulate if he advances to that line and takes Moskow is not very clear to any historians or generals, as far as I know.

Also, there was no way the German logistics could have allowed them to go all the way to the Urals, really.

Nor would have their fuel reserves. As told to Halder by Hitler himself, they had fuel for 4 months starting the instant they declare war and the USSR stops selling them fuel. Which was remarkably accurate, actually. If you count from mid June, you have July, August, September, October... and, uh, big surprise, they bog down in October.

Exactly on what fuel or transport capacity they'd keep going all the way to the Urals is never explained in such fantasy alt-history scenarios.
Absolutely and they had made a deal with the Japanese to divide Asia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_p...vision_of_Asia

Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2019, 04:11 PM   #2190
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
Pretty much.
I think I've spotted a 10-14 day cycle.
Henri posts nonsense - a day or 2 of chatter - goes quiet - 10 days later Henri posts nonsense again - repeat ad infinitum.
I think you may be right and it also agrees with my theory that he would do this ad nauseam instead of admitting he's wrong.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2019, 04:12 PM   #2191
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
Why are you posting total idocies?
Because he cannot admit when he is wrong - five years from now he'll be posting exactly the same material and saying exactly the same thing. His only plan is to exhaust everyone and finally win when everyone else dies or gives up.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 01:55 AM   #2192
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,102
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
Second, how would starting the war in 1938 have made things any harder for the Soviets?
That one is actually somewhat supportable though. The Soviet army had been significantly reduced in the 20's due to economic difficulties, and only in the mid-30's it started growing rapidly again. In 1938, IIRC the USSR technically had 98 divisions, but almost all were the "cadre divisions" of 6950 men each.

So the TOTAL soviet army in 1938 was just a bit north of 600,000 soldiers. Total. Including most of them being dispersed along the border in other places than the western border.

Those divisions also lacked the amount of artillery they'd have by 1941, lacked motorization, lacked AA worth anything, etc. (Seriously. The 45mm AA gun they used at the time was manually loaded, one round at a time, so the rate of fire was glacial, and only had a contact fuse. It was literally just a tank gun on a mount that allowed it to be cranked to shoot upwards. The chance of it actually doing anything to any airplanes was insignificant.)

In 1938 it was then decided to basically double the number of divisions, increase the number of people in a division, dramatically increase the amount of artillery in a division (although actually reaching that quota took several years), etc.

So if you could declare war on the USSR in 1938... well... you'd very probably still get owned in the end, but at least then Halder's plan to take Moskow might have actually had a chance. I mean, not that it would have achieved anything, but he could probably actually make it to his arbitrary line on the map
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 19th May 2019 at 02:01 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 03:21 AM   #2193
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,641
@ HansMustermann

The only was that Germany could have defeated the USSR would have been if Stalin's regime had collapsed when the blitzkrieg fell on it. It didn't collapse in 1941. Would it have collapsed in 1938 while Stalin's purge was still underway? Perhaps. But was Germany equipped to launch a blitzkrieg in 1938?
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 03:25 AM   #2194
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,687
Originally Posted by Hans View Post
Because he cannot admit when he is wrong - five years from now he'll be posting exactly the same material and saying exactly the same thing. His only plan is to exhaust everyone and finally win when everyone else dies or gives up.
See the Jeffrey McDonald thread for further proof of this.
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 10:26 AM   #2195
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,102
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
@ HansMustermann

The only was that Germany could have defeated the USSR would have been if Stalin's regime had collapsed when the blitzkrieg fell on it. It didn't collapse in 1941. Would it have collapsed in 1938 while Stalin's purge was still underway? Perhaps. But was Germany equipped to launch a blitzkrieg in 1938?
Well, if you've read my last paragraph, you'll know I'm not saying Germany could WIN. They might just get a little further on the map before getting its ass kicked sky high, is all I'm saying
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 10:58 AM   #2196
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,566
Most people on the internet in discussing Stalin appeasement say that Hitler could not possibly have won in Russia, or gone beyond the Urals, because of a lot of blah-blah about fuel supplies and rail tracks and German casualties and so on. Personally I am not so sure. It was touch and go for a time. There are some interesting opinions about the matter on this website:

https://history.stackexchange.com/qu...k-in-june-1941

Quote:
Stalin's purges had not only affected the armed forces, but also the intelligence services which were therefore institutionally less experienced and prepared. And their reports to Stalin had a tendency to be massaged to fit his preconceptions: evidence of German possible aggression were downplayed; examples of German forces showing restraint were emphasised. Telling Stalin things he didn't like wasn't a life-enhancing move, and that had the effect of distorting the intelligence to reinforce his hopes of no immediate attack.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 19th May 2019 at 11:01 AM.
Henri McPhee is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 11:33 AM   #2197
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,559
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Most people on the internet in discussing Stalin appeasement say that Hitler could not possibly have won in Russia, or gone beyond the Urals, because of a lot of blah-blah about fuel supplies and rail tracks and German casualties and so on. Personally I am not so sure.

Which shows that you aren't interested in facts, as if we needed any more evidence of that.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
It was touch and go for a time.

Only in how far the Germans advanced, how much damage they did, and how difficult it was for the Soviets to eventually drive them back. Never in terms of the Soviet Union's actually being conquered.

Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There are some interesting opinions about the matter on this website:

https://history.stackexchange.com/qu...k-in-june-1941

This has nothing to do with how far the Germans could have advanced. Fail.

And when are you going to answer my questions about Sea Lion '38?
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 11:38 AM   #2198
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 20,536
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Most people on the internet in discussing Stalin appeasement say that Hitler could not possibly have won in Russia, or gone beyond the Urals, because of a lot of blah-blah about fuel supplies and rail tracks and German casualties and so on. Personally I am not so sure. It was touch and go for a time. There are some interesting opinions about the matter on this website:

https://history.stackexchange.com/qu...k-in-june-1941

Why are you so blase about fuel? First you posit German aircraft flying to the UK when they didn't have the range, now you posit German tanks rolling across the steepes of Asia without any ammunition or fuel.

What's next? The Bismark helping a posited invasion of Britain before it was commissioned? Oh,

Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I agree that the senior officers in the German Navy were not as keen on an invasion of Britain as the German army and air force. I have never researched where the German battleship Bismarck was at the time, but it was a ship that was not to be underestimated. Also Admiral Canaris of the Abwehr it looks like now was one of ours, and he had the ear of Hitler at the time. It has also been said in the past that Corporal Hitler was more of an Army man than a Navy man.

All I know is that General Alan Brooke was expecting an invasion any time in September 1940, unlike many of the subsequent scholars writing about the matter in hindsight.

I agree with what this internet poster has said about the matter, even if he is not a scholar with modern data:
Until August 1940, the Bismark hadn't been launched. She wasn't ready for service until the end of the year.
my highlighting


I suppose a minor detail like a ship not being launched is a rather extreme version of logistics.

Henri - Logistics is important.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending

Last edited by jimbob; 19th May 2019 at 11:39 AM.
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 01:25 PM   #2199
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,758
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Klimax, do you really need to ask that?
Just felt like asking it. Maybe I can get hilariously bad answer...
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2019, 02:06 PM   #2200
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 15,102
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Most people on the internet in discussing Stalin appeasement say that Hitler could not possibly have won in Russia, or gone beyond the Urals, because of a lot of blah-blah about fuel supplies and rail tracks and German casualties and so on.
Because, as the military dictum goes, amateurs talk about tactics, professionals talk about logistics. And in Germany's case, all logistics predictions proved to be spot on. Even their halting to wait for supplies happened remarkably close to where the chief of logistics predicted it would. As in, within kilometres of where Wagner said.

At any rate, that someone who doesn't understand logistics "is not so sure", doesn't change anything. Halder also was not so sure, but it turned out that the logistics officers were right

Edit: but Halder, I suppose, at least has the excuse of only being too stupid to trust his logistics officers' predictions about the future. In the case of internet alt-history dumbasses, we have the even more stupid case of "being not so sure" about WHAT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED. It's no longer just prediction, it's a verified prediction that has actually happened exactly as predicted.

Edit 2: just to make it clear, things going stop-and-go isn't what should give cause to doubt the logistics estimates. It's what happens when you near the end of your logistics leash. It's the symptom that yeah, you do have a logistics problem.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 19th May 2019 at 02:17 PM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:25 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.