What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

OT: anything goes!

Moderator: Edi

Carinthium
BANNED
Posts: 527
Joined: 2010-06-29 03:35am

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Carinthium »

And repeat what a dozen posters on this very thread have already said? That continuously antagonizing lots of people doesn't make for a stable rule? That an exclusivist ideology like Nazism isn't much good for forging a lasting empire?

You know what? The Total War series isn't accurately representing real life, shock of all shocks! Conquered provinces don't become automatically pacified after a set amount of years.

Read a book.
Dominarch did have counterarguments to that stuff- arguably not good ones, but you should be able to refute his counterarguments.
Don't fucking lie. Dummyass got his his dummyass handed to him by so many posters, yet you act is if their posts don't exist.

Go play in traffic, Nazi-wanker.
Many posters responded to Dominarch, but he responded back. A lot of posts are assertions of fact- given Dominarch hasn't conceded, shouldn't you be citing your sources or something?
User avatar
Dominarch's Hope
Village Idiot
Posts: 395
Joined: 2013-01-25 01:02am

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Dominarch's Hope »

If its Metahive, dont bother. Let the hate flow through him.
Because, Murrica, thats why.
User avatar
lPeregrine
Jedi Knight
Posts: 673
Joined: 2005-01-08 01:10am

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by lPeregrine »

Dominarch's Hope wrote:Explain how there are insurgents when the population is no longer present. Explain why America would continue to embargo the Nazi state.
So you're saying that Germany exterminates the entire population of their conquered territories and you wonder why the US could possibly continue to embargo them? Even ignoring the moral issues (and even among racists genocide was hardly a majority position) that's a pretty big warning sign that the rest of the world should treat them like we treat North Korea.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Thanas »

It is unfeasible for Germany to hold onto the conquered territories long term.

1. The German economy pre-1939 was essentially unsustainable and might even have collapsed a lot sooner had Hitler not been able to use the gold reserves of Austria and Czechoslovakia.
2. This situation is not going to change because the basic economic facts are still the same. No, merely adding territories like the Low Counties, Belgium etc. is not going to do a lot. Their economies cannot be used as slave works without generating a lot of hostility among the populaces and even then the Nazi exploitation of conquered territories was never particularly effective. In fact, in 1944 people in Belgium and the Netherlands were actually starving already.
3. This situation gets even worse if Germany, as some idiot is claiming, starts exterminating the populace. Even moreso, once the populace is dead, what kind of economy is there? Every thing now would have to be maintained by the state, draining the coffers even more.
4. Germany cannot win the Naval war. Well, they might make it a lot harder for Britain by building hundreds more of subs, but that is simply going to end up with the USA building hundreds more of escorts.
5. The USA alone outproduced the entire Axis powers combined, without even a total mobilization/wartime economy. Germany is not going to be able to keep up with them in any matter.
6. Once the German economy is in shambles and people are starving (something that is a certainty, not a probability), how do you think it is going to end? How long before some Wehrmacht Generals decide that this is not going so well?
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
weemadando
SMAKIBBFB
Posts: 19195
Joined: 2002-07-28 12:30pm
Contact:

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by weemadando »

As a General loyal to Hitler and with full knowledge? You put a bullet in him first chance you get and try to have him remembered as "an ambitious reformer, struck down too soon".

Of course, you may have to expand your hit list to cover other leadership and ensure that you and other like minded generals just happen to have units on their way to manoeuvres and breaking down right outside SS and SA garrisons.

Then hope the Western allies will look kindly on your crazy requests to JUST TRUST ME IT WAS FOR THE FUTURE.

Of course this is doomed to failure for a billion reasons.
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20813
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by K. A. Pital »

CaptHawkeye wrote:Stalin kept the Soviet Union in a state of complete terror during his reign. It functioned, not well, but their was never any real threat of a coup or overthrow once Trotsky was ejected from the country. Barring the invasion Stalin never faced an enemy which came close to unseating him. His tenacious spying and ruthless suppression of dissent prevented the organization of his enemies, and even his friends were played against one another to prevent them from becoming too powerful or popular.

However, once Stalin's health started to fail his advisers were slowly able to wield more power by keeping him the dark. Though he never lost all control, he was increasingly unable to run the Soviet state through his usual means as his dexterity failed. So I guess the conclusion one can draw from Stalin's reign is that, with enough selfishness, raw brutality, and some luck, it is possible to run a state through nothing but raw fear. Though that doesn't mean it'll last for very long.
Even Stalin did not reign with "raw fear" alone - he used mass support, economic policies meant to ensure loyalty of - surprise, yeah - the more qualified proletarians in the cities, and especially engineers and qualified labourers who had a massive wage difference vs. the ordinary worker and even moreso with a peasant.

Hitler did not plan to rule with fear, he plotted the extermination of entire populations in a given territory. Such extermination would breed resistance on an unseen scale. For example, Nazis destroyed a fourth or perhaps even a third of the population of present-day Belarus; this led to a situation where the remaining two-thirds almost universally supported resistance, either passively or actively, and close to 400 000 were directly involved in the resistance.

The very fact which DH is touting here as Nazi strength (unlimited exterminatory violence) is the weakness; resistance would not stop and have zero incentive to stop since the outcome is extermination anyway. Of course one has to take a look at the scale. In Belarus it took the Nazis three years to exterminate a huge part of the populace, but the occupied territories have 10 times the population. So even with extreme slaughterspeed it would take the Nazis 30 years or possibly more to accomplish the "easy" task of depopulating the East. Resistance will be rising, and it will be brutal. Moreover, there's nowhere to send the Poles and Czechoslovaks if the USSR is not crushed - you cannot deport them to Siberia to just make them die in the cold.

So Germany is facing thirty years of endless and total partisan warfare to the bitter end, on a scale which dwarfs all post-WWII conflicts.

It is not entirely infeasible for Nazi Germany to continue existing; however, it would have to execute their genocides one and a time and try to keep the scale down. Which would mean scrapping the crazy "lebensraum" idea where over 100 million East Europeans are exterminated to make way for "future 200 million German colonists". Once you tone down the crazy, Nazi Germany might exist for a while as a smaller version of Britain. Problem is, hardly any nations would even want to be friends with it after it subdues most of Europe. The situation would be perhaps even more dire than the post-war trade restrictions against the USSR.
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
User avatar
Metahive
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2795
Joined: 2010-09-02 09:08am
Location: Little Korea in Big Germany

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Metahive »

Just look at how Napoleon fared. He was less murderous, less exclusivist but his "France surtout" approach still pissed enough people off to give his enemies enough openings to take him down. Why the fuck should Nazi Germany do any better with an economy that was based all on stealing shit from other people and abusing them to boot? Sparta had a similar way of handling this, but they paid for it by militarizing their whole society (to the point of the military being almost the only trade available for adults) , being reduced to ruling directly only a small strip of land and being reluctant to send their army away from the core lands for fear of slave uprisings. This is not a model for a continental empire like Nazi-Germany aspired to become.

Look at the more successful and longer-lasting empires in history, like China and Rome. They were brutal too at times, but at the same time they made being a member of their empire something that people could potentially look up to.

Carinthium, if you want to discuss alt-history, a minimum of knowledge of history is a requirement. It looks like neither you nor Dummyass have it since this is all quite basic information.

So yes, Nazi-wank it is.
People at birth are naturally good. Their natures are similar, but their habits make them different from each other.
-Sanzi Jing (Three Character Classic)

Saddam’s crime was so bad we literally spent decades looking for our dropped monocles before we could harumph up the gumption to address it
-User Indigo Jump on Pharyngula

O God, please don't let me die today, tomorrow would be so much better!
-Traditional Spathi morning prayer
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20813
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by K. A. Pital »

It is not even sensible Nazi wank. Nazi Germany isn't the Imperium of Man with orbital bombardment capabilities. In Dick's "Man in the High Castle" Nazis wipe out African populations, but - exterminatory projects in Africa are a lot easier to complete than in Eastern Europe, which is already quite urbanized and people have access to tools, weapons even, explosives et cetera.
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
Dr. Trainwreck
Jedi Knight
Posts: 834
Joined: 2012-06-07 04:24pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Dr. Trainwreck »

Dummynarch's Hope wrote:If its Metahive, dont bother. Let the hate flow through him.
Dude, it's not just Metahive. All your threads have had actual professionals beating you over the head with your own stupidity. No matter what you've debated, at least one debater has withdrawn in despair. You are not even wrong. Just ask a fucking question for once. Just once, ask people what they think about your conclusions. And look up what the Dunning-Kruger effect is, it could lead to a real revelation. I'm not even trying to deflate your sense of self-worth or what have you. Just... stop.
Stas Bush wrote:Nazi Germany isn't the Imperium of Man with orbital bombardment capabilities.
This would make for a great story, y'know? A young officer in the Guard or agent of the Inquistion participates in the pacification of a rebellious sytem, where he realizes that, for all their pomp and high talking, the Imperium is just the Nazis with orbital bombardment capabilities. Then, we follow this person as he tries to come to terms with his conscience. It would work great with someone who can actually write a decent character.

(Well, that's technically a derail, but I couldn't resist.)
Ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αὐτοῖσιν ἐμϐαίνουσιν, ἕτερα καὶ ἕτερα ὕδατα ἐπιρρεῖ. Δὶς ἐς τὸν αὐτὸν ποταμὸν οὐκ ἂν ἐμβαίης.

The seller was a Filipino called Dr. Wilson Lim, a self-declared friend of the M.I.L.F. -Grumman
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Thanas »

weemadando wrote:As a General loyal to Hitler and with full knowledge? You put a bullet in him first chance you get and try to have him remembered as "an ambitious reformer, struck down too soon".

Of course, you may have to expand your hit list to cover other leadership and ensure that you and other like minded generals just happen to have units on their way to manoeuvres and breaking down right outside SS and SA garrisons.

Then hope the Western allies will look kindly on your crazy requests to JUST TRUST ME IT WAS FOR THE FUTURE.

Of course this is doomed to failure for a billion reasons.
That is rather easy to pull off - had the German Generals found their balls in 1936-1938, they would have couped Hitler and easily pulled it off to boot. Sadly, there was only one Beck.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5196
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by LaCroix »

The Generals stopping him right there when he starts fantasizing about attacking Poland, which just made an alliance with Britain and France, would be the best thing the Generals could do.

Which would have been the very best outcome for Germany - it got the Saar and Rhein areas back under its control, gained Austria and the Sudetenland. Wait until March 1939, and you got the rest of Czechia, Memelland and even has Slovakia under de-facto rule.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
User avatar
Ziggy Stardust
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3114
Joined: 2006-09-10 10:16pm
Location: Research Triangle, NC

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Ziggy Stardust »

Dominarch's Hope wrote:Partisans? Being a significant drain? Forever? Against the goddamn Nazis!?

Tito will throw in the towel as soon as the GODDAMN NAZIS get tired of Yugoslavia's bullshit and start cutting a bloody swathe in response. Unless a conventional force comes to kick the Nazis out, Yugoslavia and the worst areas(Especially the non-germanic population and non-nordics) will end up getting depopulated until resistance ends.
You realize that this is EXACTLY what the Nazis tried to do in the Balkans in real life and failed? What makes you think you can hand-waive that all away with, "LOL DEY ARE NAZIS!!!!!!!1111"?
Dominarch's Hope wrote: In reality, the partisan efforts were pissdrops compared to the Bombing campaign and the Eastern Front. Especially against the Eastern Front. Partisan efforts alone arent going to do jackshit to the Nazi economy.
Yet, in real life, partisan resistance, harsh Nazi repression, and the German economic structure (that people have mentioned several times in this thread, and you have ignored) had a HUGE impact on the Nazi economy, and were one of the biggest reasons they were structurally incapable of winning the war.
Dominarch's Hope wrote: And in France? La Resistance`? It was a joke, barely a drain at all. Everywhere else? There wasnt enough resistance to care about. Like at all.
The French resistance was a joke? Because you say so? What evidence do you have that they were utterly unsuccessful?

What about the Polish Home Army? Although ultimately defeated during Operation Tempest, it was a huge movement that tied down immense resources for the Germans (and elements of the Polish resistance played a huge role for the allies in gathering intelligence and sabotaging rail networks, and were in fact incredibly important in the ultimate defeat of the Nazis).

What about the Norwegian resistance, which despite shocking brutality the Germans were never able to defeat? And, in fact, the Norwegian destruction of the heavy water plant at Norsk Hydro were a major reason the Nazi nuclear program failed.

I just find it astounding that you continue to be so obstinate about this issue. Seriously, where are you getting your information from? Even "Call of Duty 2" had a more nuanced and sophisticated outlook on World War II than you do.
Dr. Trainwreck
Jedi Knight
Posts: 834
Joined: 2012-06-07 04:24pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Dr. Trainwreck »

LaCroix wrote:The Generals stopping him right there when he starts fantasizing about attacking Poland, which just made an alliance with Britain and France, would be the best thing the Generals could do.
Wasn't there popular pressure to attack Poland anyway?
Ziggy Stardust wrote:Even "Call of Duty 2" had a more nuanced and sophisticated outlook on World War II[...]
Hey, storming the Pointe du Hoc was fucking awesome.
Ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αὐτοῖσιν ἐμϐαίνουσιν, ἕτερα καὶ ἕτερα ὕδατα ἐπιρρεῖ. Δὶς ἐς τὸν αὐτὸν ποταμὸν οὐκ ἂν ἐμβαίης.

The seller was a Filipino called Dr. Wilson Lim, a self-declared friend of the M.I.L.F. -Grumman
User avatar
Dominarch's Hope
Village Idiot
Posts: 395
Joined: 2013-01-25 01:02am

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Dominarch's Hope »

Its not they would be alone in attacking Poland. And its not like Poland wasnt willing to negotiate before France and Britain stuck there nose in it.
Because, Murrica, thats why.
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10702
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Elfdart »

Ziggy Stardust wrote:
Dominarch's Hope wrote: And in France? La Resistance`? It was a joke, barely a drain at all. Everywhere else? There wasnt enough resistance to care about. Like at all.
The French resistance was a joke? Because you say so? What evidence do you have that they were utterly unsuccessful?

What about the Polish Home Army? Although ultimately defeated during Operation Tempest, it was a huge movement that tied down immense resources for the Germans (and elements of the Polish resistance played a huge role for the allies in gathering intelligence and sabotaging rail networks, and were in fact incredibly important in the ultimate defeat of the Nazis).

What about the Norwegian resistance, which despite shocking brutality the Germans were never able to defeat? And, in fact, the Norwegian destruction of the heavy water plant at Norsk Hydro were a major reason the Nazi nuclear program failed.

I just find it astounding that you continue to be so obstinate about this issue. Seriously, where are you getting your information from? Even "Call of Duty 2" had a more nuanced and sophisticated outlook on World War II than you do.
Eisenhower said the French Resistance was worth 10-15 divisions in 1944. But then, what did he know?
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Thanas »

Dr. Trainwreck wrote:
LaCroix wrote:The Generals stopping him right there when he starts fantasizing about attacking Poland, which just made an alliance with Britain and France, would be the best thing the Generals could do.
Wasn't there popular pressure to attack Poland anyway?
Yes, but you obviously are not going to do that after getting that many territorial concessions already. Had Hitler stopped there and weathered the economic crisis to follow he might very well have ended up as a very much respected German leader.

Germany could always wait until political circumstances made it feasible to attack Poland or to partition it again. If not, the gain of so many other territories more than makes up for the loss of the corridor.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by phongn »

Dominarch's Hope wrote:It's not that they would be alone in attacking Poland. And it's not like Poland wasn't willing to negotiate before France and Britain stuck theretheir nose in it.
DH, you are required to make an effort at spelling and grammar on this board. See the above? It doesn't take much more effort to do so.

Have you even read about the invasion of Poland - and how and why France and England reacted as they did? You sound positively miffed that France and Britain were involved: should they have done nothing?
User avatar
PeZook
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13237
Joined: 2002-07-18 06:08pm
Location: Poland

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by PeZook »

Thanas wrote: Germany could always wait until political circumstances made it feasible to attack Poland or to partition it again. If not, the gain of so many other territories more than makes up for the loss of the corridor.
Frankly, once Germany proves it is not psycho, some sort of arrangement about the corridor could conceivably be reached: historically Poland would never accept it precisely because they could see the writing on the wall.

But tone down the requirements (for example, lose the exterritoriality in favor of some transit agreement, etc) and it might pass in several years. Then exploit the Polish fear of Russia and bring them into a willing anti-communist alliance...or yeah, wait until you can partition it with the blessing of other great powers.

Overall, invasion was the worst possible option.
It doesnt change Tito's fate and that of his cohorts. They are finished by 1950. Done. Over with. As would any major partisan group in the Balkans be. And besides, unless they can get to the Industrial Core, they cant do much damage anyway.


This isnt even remotely comparable to Vietnam or Afghanistan, especially since neither of those conflicts were about annexxation and absorbtion of territory. And neither of those nations were fighting a power with the willingness to expend the kind of manpower, money, and blood like the Nazis. And neither of them were fighting a power wanting the territory for itself, and not some puppet govt. And no, the USSR doesnt count. The only way it would be comparable is if they demobilized half their forces in Eastern Europe and plopped them down in Afghanistan with orders summed up to shoot them if they resist. And the USSR didnt have the borders manned and defended, like the Nazis will. Its just an entirely different situation.
The entire problem with Vietnam or Afghanistan was the expense of a protracted guerilla campaign. Both wars could've been won, had the US and USSR been willing to spend even more money and blood and repress their own population some more, but they wisely recognized that this would ruin them.

You make it sound as if fighting a ten year long extermination campaign does not cost you anything. Your genocidal armies still have to be deployed and supplied, and since the entire population resists you (because, you know, you're murdering everybody), they cannot safely draw on local resources without massive amounts of guards and importing essential labor from Germany proper. So everything from food to chamberpots has to be shipped in under escort ; your troops are only safe in heavily fortified garrisons where everything is provided for them ; you cannot trust locals to provide you with any service or even food, etc.

To add insult to injury, both Russians and the British would gleefully supply partisans with whatever they needed, for the precise reason to bleed Germany into collapsing on itself. The expense to do so is trivial compared to the forces tied down and expenses incurred by the enemy.

So yeah, eventually, after twenty years or so, the conquered lands might finally be pacified and ready to settle ; But there's no guarantee you won't bankrupt your empire into a collapse or coup first.
Image
JULY 20TH 1969 - The day the entire world was looking up

It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth. I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth. I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- NEIL ARMSTRONG, MISSION COMMANDER, APOLLO 11

Signature dedicated to the greatest achievement of mankind.

MILDLY DERANGED PHYSICIST does not mind BREAKING the SOUND BARRIER, because it is INSURED. - Simon_Jester considering the problems of hypersonic flight for Team L.A.M.E.
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5196
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by LaCroix »

Dr. Trainwreck wrote:
LaCroix wrote:The Generals stopping him right there when he starts fantasizing about attacking Poland, which just made an alliance with Britain and France, would be the best thing the Generals could do.
Wasn't there popular pressure to attack Poland anyway?
No, there was pressure to find a solution for the isolated parts of the homeland. And after bringing Saarland, Rhein, Austria and Czechoslovakia into the Reich, which would have grown about 50% by these aquisitions, you have more than enough political capital to appease the population.

Talk to them about consolidation, about integrating the territories, building infrastructure and industry.

That would mean that you can build Autobahnen for the next 5 years, build lots of factories, start mining operations. That means more work for Germans, and also more work and better standard of living for the to be integrated slavs. (Keeps down on that costly supressing business.) Improve relations with France and Britain, especially trade.

Let things develop, keep contact with Poland, make reasonable demands (like simple guarantee treaties), expand trade with Poland. Make a cross-border comuting agreement, let Poles work in German frontier businesses with only slight tarifs on that... Stuff like that - show them how great it is to be part of the Reich. Once Stalin starts showing his true face, Germany would become an attractive option.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
Dr. Trainwreck
Jedi Knight
Posts: 834
Joined: 2012-06-07 04:24pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Dr. Trainwreck »

Stuff which generally can't be done with the Nazis thinking like Dominarch. Yeah, I get it. Thanks.
Ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αὐτοῖσιν ἐμϐαίνουσιν, ἕτερα καὶ ἕτερα ὕδατα ἐπιρρεῖ. Δὶς ἐς τὸν αὐτὸν ποταμὸν οὐκ ἂν ἐμβαίης.

The seller was a Filipino called Dr. Wilson Lim, a self-declared friend of the M.I.L.F. -Grumman
User avatar
LadyTevar
White Mage
White Mage
Posts: 23423
Joined: 2003-02-12 10:59pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by LadyTevar »

Moved to More Appropriate Forum.
Image
Nitram, slightly high on cough syrup: Do you know you're beautiful?
Me: Nope, that's why I have you around to tell me.
Nitram: You -are- beautiful. Anyone tries to tell you otherwise kill them.

"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy, last Tweet
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Thanas »

Moved back to more appropriate forum, as it had already been moved to OT as per Guidelines of the History forum.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
Dominarch's Hope
Village Idiot
Posts: 395
Joined: 2013-01-25 01:02am

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Dominarch's Hope »

Elfdart wrote:
Ziggy Stardust wrote:
Dominarch's Hope wrote: And in France? La Resistance`? It was a joke, barely a drain at all. Everywhere else? There wasnt enough resistance to care about. Like at all.
The French resistance was a joke? Because you say so? What evidence do you have that they were utterly unsuccessful?

What about the Polish Home Army? Although ultimately defeated during Operation Tempest, it was a huge movement that tied down immense resources for the Germans (and elements of the Polish resistance played a huge role for the allies in gathering intelligence and sabotaging rail networks, and were in fact incredibly important in the ultimate defeat of the Nazis).

What about the Norwegian resistance, which despite shocking brutality the Germans were never able to defeat? And, in fact, the Norwegian destruction of the heavy water plant at Norsk Hydro were a major reason the Nazi nuclear program failed.

I just find it astounding that you continue to be so obstinate about this issue. Seriously, where are you getting your information from? Even "Call of Duty 2" had a more nuanced and sophisticated outlook on World War II than you do.
Eisenhower said the French Resistance was worth 10-15 divisions in 1944. But then, what did he know?

The term "Politics" comes to mind. Did Germany actually have that many divisions stationed there for anti-insurgecny efforts?

Nope.
Because, Murrica, thats why.
User avatar
ryacko
Padawan Learner
Posts: 412
Joined: 2009-12-28 08:27pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by ryacko »

1. Kill Hitler. But do it painlessly, since apparently as part of the RAR I'm supposed to be loyal to the guy. Carry on his beliefs in... spirit?
2. Cancel the battleships and move resources from those into submarines and tanks.
3. Avoid the more severe forms of anti-semitism. Disenfranchising your most brilliant and capable citizens would just be stupid.
4. Move to a total war economy and don't waste resources on insane projects (a-bomb, Maus, etc). Delay war by two more years. Even if the allies rearm themselves to a greater extent, they'll never use their arms efficiently.
5. Don't invade Norway until after the allies invade it.
6. Pressure the French to declare war on Britain after the British attack the French fleet. It's worth a shot, probably won't work, but French industry would be enough to turn the tide of the war. One million French POWs would also no longer have to be fed, although French reparations to the Reich may have to be reduced and the POWs would no longer provide labor.
7. No Tiger tanks. Start development on the Panther before the Russian invasion, and with a 8.8cm gun. Panzer IV is to be the medium tank from 1939 onwards.
8. Avoid brutality if possible in the East. The communists were just losers in an election, and a Russian liberation army could be raised of sufficient size.
9. Households will have to do without maids, women in industry is inevitable, etc.

No doubt after doing the above, the following will be true:
-The German public will be extremely war weary and subject to late WWI conditions, thus if the war continues past the fourth year, there could be internal revolution.
-If the A-A line in Russia isn't taken OR Britain starved into signing peace, then the war is lost.
Suffering from the diminishing marginal utility of wealth.
User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10702
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

Post by Elfdart »

Dominarch's Hope wrote:
Elfdart wrote:Eisenhower said the French Resistance was worth 10-15 divisions in 1944. But then, what did he know?

The term "Politics" comes to mind.
Funny, but every time you post, the word "fucktard" comes to mind.
Did Germany actually have that many divisions stationed there for anti-insurgecny efforts?
Every German soldier used to garrison railroads and other key positions well away from the front lines was taking part in "anti-insurgency efforts".

Nope.
You're right -the Germans used more than that:
LOCATION: France south of the Loire River.

TIME PERIODS: First six months of 1944; July-August 1944.

GENERAL TACTICAL SITUATION: Having occupied France since the armistice of 1940, the Germans had prepared fortified positions along the coasts to guard against Allied invasion. French insurgency had been increasing rapidly through 1943 and the first half of 1944 and was a serious problem over the entire country, despite the presence in all of France of some 160,000 German police. After Allied landings in Normandy in June, 1944, an army of insurgents estimated at about 70,000 men continued to operate in the region south of the Loire until German withdrawal from southern France in the last half of August.

TYPE OF LINE OF COMMUNICATIONS: The main road and rail route ran south from Dijon down the valley of the Rhone River for about 350 airline miles through territory infested with insurgents amid a populace hostile to the Germans. Another critical line was the road and rail route across southwestern France from Bordeaux to Carcassonne, the Carcassonne Gap, route of contact between German forces in southwestern France and those along the southern coast.

NUMBER OF COMBAT TROOPS IN THEATER OR SECTOR: Until June, approximately 220,000; after the end of June, about 150,000.

NUMBER OF COMBAT TROOPS DEPLOYED TO PROTECT LoC: Until Allied landings in Normandy on 6 June, two divisions (one of which was only at about half strength) were always held out for general security tasks. There was in addition a group of separate battalions making up a so-called Ost Legion, which all together represented approximately division strength. And a "reserve" corps of about one division strength was assigned permanently to keeping open the Carcassonne Gap. Thus, about 31 divisions out of the line at all times on security tasks, about 30,000 men. After the Allied landings in Normandy, the Germans in southern France lost the equivalent of 5 divisions to the northern front, including one of the divisions that had been on security duty; but from time to time additional units were pulled out of the line for security assignments, so that the average employed on this task probably remained at about 30,000.

PERCENTAGE OF COMBAT TROOPS EMPLOYED TO PROTECT LoC: Until June, approximately 13 percent; after the end of June, about 20 percent.

DEGREE OF SUCCESS IN PROTECTING LoC: The Germans were never able to make their lines of communications secure. All convoys and rail movements had to be protected by armed escorts. By the time of Allied landings in southern France on 15 August, no rail routes to the south were open. As the Germans fell back from southern France, they were constantly harassed and attacked by insurgent groups. Retreating columns as large as 20,000 men were kept under almost constant harassment and attack.
Keep in mind that this was southern France.
Locked