Page 3 of 3
World War II Question
Posted: 19 Jan 2026, 16:18
by zico
Been watching quite a lot of stuff recently such as Nuremberg, The Rise and Fall of Hitler documentary on Netflix and several podcasts with various war historians and it becomes more apparent with everything I watch that there were so many twists of fate that led to Hitler's rise to power, not to mention the numerous opportunities to stop him.
One question nags me though and I can't really find an answer, probably because it's totally hypothetical, but if the USA had entered the war in 1939 would it have been all over and done with in a couple of years or could it have been more devastating considering in those early days the Soviet Union had a pact with Germany so if the Americans had entered earlier could the Allies have ended up fighting the Soviets as well if they had stayed as an ally of Germany?
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 10:55
by Swiss.
Far Cough UKunt" wrote: ↑20 Jan 2026, 10:52
Yeah, Stalingrad was a proper meat grinder.
The 6th Army had many opportunites to break out.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 10:52
by Far Cough UKunt
Yeah, Stalingrad was a proper meat grinder.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 10:51
by Swiss.
75% of the German forces were on the Russian front.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 10:50
by Swiss.
zico wrote: ↑20 Jan 2026, 08:49
Russ of the BML" wrote: ↑20 Jan 2026, 07:49
One of the most alarming moments of WW2 for me is the fact that Hitler didn't push home the advantage gained at Dunkirk. Instead, believing the Britain was defeated, he turned his forces into Russia and created the Eastern Front. I always wonder how this would've affected our parents and grand-parents had Hitler invaded Britain with boots and actually occupied it.
This intrigued me as well which is what lead to my interest with my original question. This fascinating series on Hitler suggests one reason was Goering persuaded Hitler that the Luftwaffe forces would be enough to destroy the British through constant bombardment and, therefore, there was no need to deploy ground troops. Goering then eventually made the mistake of bombing cities rather than RAF airfields, which allowed the RAF to regroup. Only one reason of course, I suspect that there were many others.
Goering often over played the strength of the Luftwaffe especially in convincing Hitler that he could keep suppling Paulus and the 6th Army encircled at Stalingrad. Read Alan Clarke's Barbarossa. An excellent read.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 10:10
by Westside
goose wrote: ↑20 Jan 2026, 09:41
There was some bits in the media last week from some people in the US government about how they won the second world war and saved europe.
I saw a video from a history professor saying that in terms of supplying munitions etc - yes they did. But it was the Russians who beat the Germans. Something like 65% of German troops were fighting on the eastern front and were beaten by the Russians. The US/UK etc were only fighting one third of the German troops.
Something I learned only very recently, as well as the weapons and munitions us and the Americans supplied Russia, was the massive amount of train rolling stock, supplied to the Russians, by the US. 2,000 engines and 11,000 carriages, gave the Russians much needed logistical support, to move troops and munitions.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 10:06
by Far Cough UKunt
...and America was fighting the Japs almost on their own although there was quite a few commonwealth forces alongside them in the Pacific theatre.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 09:41
by goose
There was some bits in the media last week from some people in the US government about how they won the second world war and saved europe.
I saw a video from a history professor saying that in terms of supplying munitions etc - yes they did. But it was the Russians who beat the Germans. Something like 65% of German troops were fighting on the eastern front and were beaten by the Russians. The US/UK etc were only fighting one third of the German troops.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 09:32
by Westside
Russ of the BML" wrote: ↑20 Jan 2026, 07:49
I believe it is quite commonly known that one of the reasons for USA's later entry into the war was due to concerns about Russia's stance on Germany. Although, even at that time, the German and Russia Pact was not in tatters but was close to collapse. Some conspiracy theorists argue that the USA were holding out until they felt Germany was weak enough to defeat, but I don't buy that. Obviously Pearl Harbour changed everything.
One of the most alarming moments of WW2 for me is the fact that Hitler didn't push home the advantage gained at Dunkirk. Instead, believing the Britain was defeated, he turned his forces into Russia and created the Eastern Front. I always wonder how this would've affected our parents and grand-parents had Hitler invaded Britain with boots and actually occupied it.
Even if the Battle of Britain had been lost, a German invasion of Britain would have failed. The Royal Navy would have decimated the invasion fleet (whilst sufferening massive losses themselves). Germany had no amphibious assault ships, or landing craft they would have towed barges across the Channel. Fast moving British destroyers would be difficult targets to hit from the air (destroyers lost at Dunkirk, were moored up, boarding troops, not manouvering in open water). The wakes from the destroyers would have swamped and capsized the barges. To say nothing of ramming them or shelling them. Germany had no navy to speak off to protect and support the invasion (too many destroyer losses in their invasion of Norway).
Operation Sealion was war gamed at Sandhurst back in the 70's. Germany lost.
Many, many other reasons why the invasion would have failed. Plenty of good articles on line, about it.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 08:49
by zico
Russ of the BML" wrote: ↑20 Jan 2026, 07:49
One of the most alarming moments of WW2 for me is the fact that Hitler didn't push home the advantage gained at Dunkirk. Instead, believing the Britain was defeated, he turned his forces into Russia and created the Eastern Front. I always wonder how this would've affected our parents and grand-parents had Hitler invaded Britain with boots and actually occupied it.
This intrigued me as well which is what lead to my interest with my original question. This fascinating series on Hitler suggests one reason was Goering persuaded Hitler that the Luftwaffe forces would be enough to destroy the British through constant bombardment and, therefore, there was no need to deploy ground troops. Goering then eventually made the mistake of bombing cities rather than RAF airfields, which allowed the RAF to regroup. Only one reason of course, I suspect that there were many others.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 08:33
by Jean-Luc Paul Goddard
Russ of the BML" wrote: ↑20 Jan 2026, 07:49
I always wonder how this would've affected our parents and grand-parents had Hitler invaded Britain with boots and actually occupied it.
They'd have had to put up with other Europeans calling us beef eating surrender monkeys.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 07:57
by Mr Anon
It probably would have been the worst scenario, The combined UK/US would have probably fought to a stalemate with Axis powers in Europe, as Germany would not have opened a second front. Both sides would have held out long enough for the bomb to be developed by one, if not both sides, these would have been used in Europe.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 07:49
by Russ of the BML
I believe it is quite commonly known that one of the reasons for USA's later entry into the war was due to concerns about Russia's stance on Germany. Although, even at that time, the German and Russia Pact was not in tatters but was close to collapse. Some conspiracy theorists argue that the USA were holding out until they felt Germany was weak enough to defeat, but I don't buy that. Obviously Pearl Harbour changed everything.
One of the most alarming moments of WW2 for me is the fact that Hitler didn't push home the advantage gained at Dunkirk. Instead, believing the Britain was defeated, he turned his forces into Russia and created the Eastern Front. I always wonder how this would've affected our parents and grand-parents had Hitler invaded Britain with boots and actually occupied it.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 20 Jan 2026, 00:20
by Monsieur merde de cheval
To the victors lay the spoils.
And the narrative that follows.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 19 Jan 2026, 19:25
by Far Cough UKunt
Indeed, it was the army that were gung ho in wanting to attack the Americans, the navy under Yamamoto were more circumspect, as he had lived and worked in the US and the UK and understood that once America had ramped up war production, it would only be a matter of time, like he said, I could run riot for a year or two but after that, no guarantees, or words to that effect.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 19 Jan 2026, 19:04
by SurfaceAgentX2Zero
Hitler's failure to learn from his defeat at the Battle of Moscow along with the entry into the war of the USA were the turning points. I suspect Germany had already lost the war by the time of Stalingrad. If they'd somehow won there they'd have been defeated straight afterwards.
Germany had already started to take substantial losses in 1942, equipment it had no way to quickly replace and manpower it couldn't replace at all.
Japan's intervention against the USA was pretty close to insane.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 19 Jan 2026, 18:50
by RBshorty
nychammer wrote: ↑19 Jan 2026, 16:57
it all happened in 1941
Germany invades USSR in June
Japan attacks Pearl Harbour in Dec
America enters the war one day later
It still took 3.5 years for the Germans to surrender.
If i read it correctly, aside Poland invasion the Russians and Germans weren't allies in a true military sense, rather they had a non aggression pact. I'm not sure if the Russians would have suddenly taken up arms against the USA, who knows they they may have been relieved.
How the fuck could have the Russians laid a glove on the USA. Back in the early 1940’s. Let alone any hardware.? Uncle Joe was too busy wiping out his own military hierarchy the previous decade. And was unseen by everyone for a week. The moment the Germans rolled in..1941 was certainly the turning point in the Pacific. But nothing was certain in Europe Until Stalingrad in February 43. The Germans had lost a shit tonne of aircraft at El Alamein the previous November. And an entire Army.! (Roughly 1.5 million men.) In the snow.
After that. It was always going to when. Not how.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 19 Jan 2026, 17:31
by ,
The USA had no reason to declare war on Germany in 1939. Furthermore there was no appetite in the USA for a global conflict at that time.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 19 Jan 2026, 16:57
by nychammer
it all happened in 1941
Germany invades USSR in June
Japan attacks Pearl Harbour in Dec
America enters the war one day later
It still took 3.5 years for the Germans to surrender.
If i read it correctly, aside Poland invasion the Russians and Germans weren't allies in a true military sense, rather they had a non aggression pact. I'm not sure if the Russians would have suddenly taken up arms against the USA, who knows they they may have been relieved.
Re: World War II Question
Posted: 19 Jan 2026, 16:31
by Far Cough UKunt
Hitler had no intention of keeping to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, he was always going to invade the USSR for Lebensraum.