Skimmer and Stas Bush

[Darth Fanboy]

Oh god, try making some serious research into WWII matters.
Have you seen Luftwaffe losses? Uh... That's enough to make Hitler go awya from Britain, but certainly nothing to help other countries.
Luftwaffe ROAMING OVER RUSSIA? Yes, it was. It was roaming only as far as it's short-range bomber allowed. Germany had no long- range bomber even NEAR to B-17, in case you didn't know.
The Germans were technologically superior in the War, but NOT in all aspects

Superior enough that if the US and UK werent landing on normandy the German Empire would have made its way to fucking Siberia. And if Germany had been able to push farther and not have to engage on the second front the Luftwaffe would have been able to follow the German soldiers.

Germany would have built airbases and brought its planes over, as it stands they were forced instead to defend their own airspace fool. and the Russian AIr force was nowhere near as pwerful as the RAF. the RAF was a powerful fighting force with modern equipment and skilled pilots to boot and the soviet air force was stuck with antiquated planes and equipment.

The North Korea regime seemed to have a crisis, but recent news show they have somehow avoided it. Let's see if they'll be capable of holding the communist regime weiter.

you must get your news from Kim Jong Il's offical blog or something. The population is starving, people are forced into slavery at military prisons, they are suffering the Asian Economic crisis as much as anyone (except for China which is doing well it seems)

[Vympel]

Superior enough that if the US and UK werent landing on normandy the German Empire would have made its way to fucking Siberia.

You're full of shit. By the time the Allies were landing in Normandy the Germans had no chance of victory, and in fact were reeling from a Soviet offensive that carried all the way to the borders of the Reich- success after success. After 1943 the Germans lost the initiative totally, and were defeated. It was a matter of time. Learn some goddamn history before you run your mouth off- the words Moscow 41, Stalingrad 42, and Kursk 43 seem to be totally beyond you. Operation Bagration 44 would also be a good one.

And if Germany had been able to push farther and not have to engage on the second front the Luftwaffe would have been able to follow the German soldiers.

The war had been going for three years in the Soviet Union by the time the second front happened, dumbass.

Germany would have built airbases and brought its planes over, as it stands they were forced instead to defend their own airspace fool. and the Russian AIr force was nowhere near as pwerful as the RAF. the RAF was a powerful fighting force with modern equipment and skilled pilots to boot and the soviet air force was stuck with antiquated planes and equipment.

More ignorant bullshit. The Soviet aircraft were some of the best fighters of the war: Il-2 Sturmovik, La-5FN, Yak-3 (used by the Free French squadron- who had their pick of every allied fighter, dumbass). You'd also like to know that the top-scoring Allied ace of the war was a Soviet: Ivan Kozhedub, with 62 kills. Oops!

Without US and UK aid, the Soviet Union would've had a much tougher time- the biggest aid was in trucks, food, and aviation fuel. No side could have won the war in the time it took alone.

I'm inclined to lock this thread, actually. Nothing annoys me more than infantile who fought hardest in WW2. Soviet Union, undoutedly. But war over in 45 alone? Never. US and UK aid was instrumental, and the second front greatly hastened the end.

[The Dark]

Without US and UK aid, the Soviet Union would've had a much tougher time- the biggest aid was in trucks, food, and aviation fuel. No side could have won the war in the time it took alone.

I agree that nobody could have won alone in the time it took, although you forgot automotive fuel (higher percentage than aviation fuel). However, as I said before, Marshal Zhukov himself said Russia would not have been able to fight without the Lend-Lease Act. To quote the Marshal of the Army again:

we had no explosives and powder. There was none to equip rifle bullets. The Americans actually came to our assistance with powder and explosives.

This was recorded by "security organs" in 1963 (not sure which one, the source declined to say), but it is corroborated by Boris V. Sokolov, in his paper "The Role of Lend-Lease in Soviet Military
Efforts, 1941-1945". As I have said, the USSR heavily de-emphasized the assistance of Lend-Lease, likely in order to help justify the heavy losses caused by inferior leadership after the Purge.

[Sea Skimmer]

The war had been going for three years in the Soviet Union by the time the second front happened, dumbass.

And the Allies had been bombing Germany for two years before that. There was always a second front. The air war over Germany absorbed millions of German troops, millions more workers just to repair damage and attempt to rebuild shattered cities, while also taking up the majority of Germanys aircraft and preventing the production of many others.

[SirNitram]

Woah, one mistaken number by me and we get all off topic. I love my power.

[Darth Fanboy]

You're full of shit. By the time the Allies were landing in Normandy the Germans had no chance of victory, and in fact were reeling from a Soviet offensive that carried all the way to the borders of the Reich- success after success. After 1943 the Germans lost the initiative totally, and were defeated. It was a matter of time. Learn some goddamn history before you run your mouth off- the words Moscow 41, Stalingrad 42, and Kursk 43 seem to be totally beyond you. Operation Bagration 44 would also be a good one.

Maybe Normandy wasn't the nest phrase to use but there was still a Western front that Germany had to deal with and without that they would have done it, which is my opinion.

The war had been going for three years in the Soviet Union by the time the second front happened, dumbass.

So those battles with England never happened? Germany still had western threats during that time and also had to commit forces to the occupation of France and other nations.

More ignorant bullshit. The Soviet aircraft were some of the best fighters of the war: Il-2 Sturmovik, La-5FN, Yak-3 (used by the Free French squadron- who had their pick of every allied fighter, dumbass). You'd also like to know that the top-scoring Allied ace of the war was a Soviet: Ivan Kozhedub, with 62 kills. Oops!

Without US and UK aid, the Soviet Union would've had a much tougher time- the biggest aid was in trucks, food, and aviation fuel. No side could have won the war in the time it took alone.

And those aircraft were present at the beginning of the war when Germany was winning? Russia wouldn't have had time to develop thos eplanes if the Third Reich had been able to push past Stalingrad.

Without US/UK aid the Soviets would have been defeated completely.

I'm inclined to lock this thread, actually. Nothing annoys me more than infantile who fought hardest in WW2. Soviet Union, undoutedly. But war over in 45 alone? Never. US and UK aid was instrumental, and the second front greatly hastened the end.

oh bring out your almight "Im a mod so whatever I say is right powers, it'd be a great way to get in the last word without allowing rebuttal. And never once did I say the Russians didn't fight hard against the Germans, they ought bravely and gave their lives to a noble and just cause but they weren't winning until Germany made its way deep into Russian territory. Then winter kicked in and Russia was able to better exploit.

[Howedar]

Darth Fanboy, you're wrong. I totally disagree with that idiot troll, but you're wrong nonetheless.

[Dalton]

Fanboy, Vympel: Keep it down or I'LL lock the thread.

[Vympel]

Maybe Normandy wasn't the nest phrase to use but there was still a Western front that Germany had to deal with and without that they would have done it, which is my opinion.

And it's a dumbass wrong opinion. Go read a history book.

So those battles with England never happened? Germany still had western threats during that time and also had to commit forces to the occupation of France and other nations.

And they were a fraction of the size of the forces engaged in the Soviet Union, and poorly equipped in comparison. Good one.

And those aircraft were present at the beginning of the war when Germany was winning? Russia wouldn't have had time to develop thos eplanes if the Third Reich had been able to push past Stalingrad.

They couldn't have pushed past Stalingrad. It was militarily IMPOSSIBLE. In addition, all of those aircraft were follow-on developments from aircraft the Soviets had at the start of the war- which were excellent aircraft by themselves (early Sturmovik models, Yak-1 come to mind).

Without US/UK aid the Soviets would have been defeated completely.

Rubbish.

oh bring out your almight "Im a mod so whatever I say is right powers, it'd be a great way to get in the last word without allowing rebuttal.

Good call considering the thread is open.

And never once did I say the Russians didn't fight hard against the Germans, they ought bravely and gave their lives to a noble and just cause but they weren't winning until Germany made its way deep into Russian territory. Then winter kicked in and Russia was able to better exploit.

Ah, the good ol 'General Winter won the war' bullshit argument.

[Vympel]

The war had been going for three years in the Soviet Union by the time the second front happened, dumbass.

And the Allies had been bombing Germany for two years before that. There was always a second front. The air war over Germany absorbed millions of German troops, millions more workers just to repair damage and attempt to rebuild shattered cities, while also taking up the majority of Germanys aircraft and preventing the production of many others.

I don't dispute any of that. What I dispute is that the Western air war didn't start anywhere near in earnest until 43. Up until 43, the majority of Luftwaffe strength was in the East, not the West- it was the main theatre. In addition, the attrition suffered during Barbarossa led to a steady deterioration in the experience level of aircrews and pilots- this comes from A Strategy for Defeat- a book on the Luftwaffe.

[Howedar]

By all accounts, the winter was a major factor.

[Vympel]

By all accounts, the winter was a major factor.

In Moscow 1941. Another major factor in Moscow 1941 was also Zhukov's Siberians. After Moscow 41 the winter argument fails utterly.

[Howedar]

I didn't say that it was the only factor. Just that it was a factor.

[Vympel]

I didn't say that it was the only factor. Just that it was a factor.

I know, just heading off the usual misinterpretation that comes from not adding a caveat to something.

[Howedar]

Truely, there has been no campaign or battle in the history of mankind that rode on a single factor, and there never will. Life is more complicated than that.

[Darth Fanboy]

Darth Fanboy, you're wrong. I totally disagree with that idiot troll, but you're wrong nonetheless.

An awful broad statement for someone not using any evidence.

EDIT: Or examples.

[Cal Wright]

Sea Skimmer
Iraq is NOT a threat to anyone. Perhaps North Korea is more of a threat. But because it is MORE of a threat, no one attacks it.

Attacking a defenceless, hopeless contry is a coward act....

Who will stop N. Korea? Let's see, S. Korea, Japan, and China for starters.

[Cal Wright]

Is it because you dislike the idea of America kicking out a dictator and rebuilding a country shattered by 20 years of conflict?

What is it with you lot and the black and white fallacy? Sheesh.

Black, white, hell, the pro-American people are on one side, the anti war nuts are on the other. Pot, kettle, black.

[K. A. Pital]

Darth Fanboy
You're just wrong. And that's all. The Allies didn't open any "Western front" until even the very last chance for the Reich, Operation Zitadelle, failed utterly because the Germans were outnumbered 1:6. Check out the history.
What the Allies did?
In fact: they waited and gave minor support to USSR until it was clear that the USSR wins. When it was clear, they gave some more support, nevertheless by this time all they did was irrelevant - USSR speeded up industry.
You brag that the USSR supported Hitler's Empire. Well, it's because the Reich attacked neither USSR nor it's allies. Once it did, the fate of the war was sealed, I think. Having no long-range bombers, making great strategical mistakes because of Hitler and having winter war, Germany losed the war.
The Allies took part in the European war in late 1943, beginning their effective bombing runs (some have bragged they did bombing before, but it had no effect, and therefore is irrelevant). They were now only into politics - they wanted to chop off a part of Europe before the USSR takes it whole.
The ONLY considerable war effort of the Allies is the defeat of Japan. But it's completely irrelevant speaking of the Reich, because the Axis countries had poor dependence on each other, ex. Italy, which was pleading for help each time it failed.
In the war with Japan, everything was fine except that tiny bomb. Not a single man believed that day he's secure.

If you would ever bother to read: Liddel Gart, Roskill, Churchill, Doenitz, Ruge, Halder, Zhukov, Guderian, Rommel, Mannstein, Nimitz. Check out those. Speak to a few veterans. Afterwards we speak about Allies vs. Axis. That's the basics of such a discussion.
WGR, Stas.

[Vympel]

IMO, Stalin's non-agresison pact with Hitler was a direct result of the snubbing that the Soviet Union got from the Allies throughout the 1930s. It was a necessary evil, securing the threat from Reich, in Stalin's eyes, until the USSR was more ready to meet it. Regardless, Hitler attacked before Stalin thought he would- indeed- before Hitler's generals thought he should as well.

[Cpt_Frank]

Having no long-range bombers, making great strategical mistakes because of Hitler and having winter war, Germany losed the war.

The funny thing about the long-range bombers is that there were several prototype models ready for serial production and service by 1942 but they weren't built since Göring underestimated their importance.

Another factor was that the Soviet union was able to maintain production under almost impossible circumstances, (sometimes they moved the production facilities hundreds of kilometers to the east), and they also had much more soldiers at their disposal.

[Axis Kast]

You have serious, serious issues in your head, if you think any of the civilized world applauded that action.

Certain Palestinians were dancing in the streets. What? Are they now “uncivilized?” Barbarians, perhaps?

Behind closed doors, September 11th was viewed as a boon. While some wept over the tragedy and loss, they also came to know it as a unique way in which American power was slowly being eroded. Then came the jump of logic: “It may be horrid, but isn’t it closing the gap between the United States and others?”

The UN disagrees with America once and it's an 'Anti-American Debating Society'. People like you remind me why I don't invite my relatives to this country.

Most of the rest of the world is anti-American. The United Nations at this point in time has become a forum on which to target President Bush and the White House. That might potentially change within another several years, but I doubt it. More likely, everything we do from now on in will be an increasingly uphill affair. Sure we’ll have periodic agreement over minor issues or some rare topic that demands unanimity for whatever reason, but a new trend of dissent might well have begun.

[MKSheppard]

Without US and UK aid, the Soviet Union would've had a much tougher time- the biggest aid was in trucks, food, and aviation fuel. No side could have won the war in the time it took alone.

How about "very very hard", as most of the Red Army's motorized and mechanized forces came from US supplied trucks and half-tracks?

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/lend.html
Lend Lease to Russia

Steam locomotives & engines 1,168 cost: $101,075,116

In 1945 alone, we sent 4,559 trucks to russia.

http://airforce.users.ru/lend-lease/eng ... veries.htm

Lend-lease aircraft amounted to 18% of all aircraft in the Soviet air forces, 20% of all bombers, and 16-23% of all fighters (numbers vary depending on calculation methods), and 29% of all naval aircraft. In some AF commands and fronts the proportion of Lend-Lease aircraft was even higher: of the 9.888 fighters delivered to the air defense (PVO) fighter units in 1941-45 6.953 (or over 70%!) were British or American. In the AF of the Karelian front lend-lease aircraft amounted to about two-thirds of all combat aircraft in 1942-43, practically all torpedo bombers of the naval air forces were A-20G Bostons in 1944-45 etc.

Some American aircraft types were simply irreplaceable and very highly appreciated on all levels during the war, e.g. P-39 Airacobra fighters, A-20 Boston and B-25 Mitchell bombers and C-47 transport aircraft.

Several Soviet aces scored more than 40 victories with Airacobras. G.A.Rechkalov's 50 victories are apparently the highest score ever with an American fighter, while the No.2 Soviet ace A.I.Pokryshkin claimed 48 of his 59 victories when flying Airacobras.

[Sea Skimmer]

[

You'd also like to know that the top-scoring Allied ace of the war was a Soviet: Ivan Kozhedub, with 62 kills. Oops!

Yes, and the wars top scoring Ace, Erich Hartmann got most of his 352 kills on the Eastern Front.

[Vympel]

Yes, and the wars top scoring Ace, Erich Hartmann got most of his 352 kills on the Eastern Front.

Yeah, so what?