WWII discussion

[hyperlite]

I have heard a lot of claims about the war, like Hitler would have won it if he did this or didn't do that, and that the American M1 Garand won the war, or the Russian T-34 tank won the war, but would it have mattered? If Hitler took out RAF airfields instead of bombing cities, would the British surrender? And what if Churchill wasn't so motivating and confident, would the Brits have given up? No conspiracy theories until 2nd page. Then go for it.

[Iv121]

Well what won the war wasn't some strategy, or weapon, it was the humans, and among all of them there was a distinct group - the 21 millions Stalin sent to death on the Eastern front. If you ask me what was the turning point in the war, it would be the battle of Stalingrad where the Russians began the offense for the first time in the war, it will take them 4 years to reclaim what the Germans captured in less than a year, and with a terrible cost. If Stalin valued his soldiers just a little bit he could have saved millions of people. Some things they fought for like the city of Stalingrad were purely a propaganda war to prove which ideology was superior - The communist or * one.

An interesting fact is that a day ago the Russians celebrated 70 years to the liberation of Leningrad - or Saint-Petersburg nowadays. The Germans put a siege on the city of 3 million, starving the population to death or bombing them out. The city survived only because during the winter of 1942 the Russians organized a convoy over the sea with cars, driving over thin ice and under heavy bombardment by the German planes. By the time the city was liberated from 3 million only 600,000 were left. For the occasion they made a good film about it, shame most of you don't know Russian. BTW another interesting thing is that the city wasn't evacuated because the leadership in Leningrad was afraid they will be accused of cowardness, in there it was possible to save more lives, too.

[ACH0225]

I'll never understand why the Russians kept the T-34 in operation for so long(1940-now). The Russians just really never throw away military anything, I guess.

[Iv121]

Now ? Its not in operation now just to let you know, currently the Russians drive in T-90-S , modified version of T-90, it is pretty similar to the M1 Abrams, which doesn't mean anything good for neither the M1 or the T-90 ...

I guess they don't really need more than that, after all a bullet is a bullet and a shell is a shell, these things can kill and for them its enough.

After the T-34 the Russians developed T-44, T-54. T-72, from there T-90 and finally T-90-S nowadays. BTW the T-90 is a direct modification of the T-72 which means it is relatively old relative to other tanks nowadays

[CMA]

Hitler was retarded, the guy did alright when he let his generals run everything, but towards the end he thought of himself as some big smart ubermensch that don't need no strategy.
Division Azul ftw...

[hyperlite]

The Eastern Front was the turning point, but I am saying if Hitler had chosen to not invade Russia (always a bad idea, nobody conquers Russia) and Hitler had put the Sturmgewehr 44 into mass production, what would have happened? If Nazis poured over the Russian border the next spring, what would have happened?

[ACH0225]

Now ? Its not in operation now just to let you know, currently the Russians drive in T-90-S , modified version of T-90, it is pretty similar to the M1 Abrams, which doesn't mean anything good for neither the M1 or the T-90 ...

I guess they don't really need more than that, after all a bullet is a bullet and a shell is a shell, these things can kill and for them its enough.

After the T-34 the Russians developed T-44, T-54. T-72, from there T-90 and finally T-90-S nowadays. BTW the T-90 is a direct modification of the T-72 which means it is relatively old relative to other tanks nowadays

You skipped the T-64, which was amazing, and the T-80, which had the T-80U ubertank.

[Iv121]

Well the Russians weren't exactly sleeping either, Stalin made an agreement with Hitler to buy himself time to prepare forces, yet he still believed him which is why the initial hit was so hard. Hitler's problem was that he needed the Russian raw resources to support his war machine, which is why he turned east. It also went well with his ideology and overall was filled with only benefits, if only he could overcome the Russian winter which was extremely harsh in 1942. BTW to win against the Russians you have to win them from inside, not by conquering territory, the later will take you ages and you will see nothing but tundra.

@ACH I talked about the main MBTs they used. BTW did you know that by many parameters the T-90 is better than the abrams ?

[hyperlite]

What if crazy Hitler got nuclear weapons before the U.S. Or Aliens, conspiracy can start early.

[ACH0225]

@ACH I talked about the main MBTs they used. BTW did you know that by many parameters the T-90 is better than the abrams ?

T-64 and T-80 were main MBTs. T-80s were in Chechnya and there were no wars for the T-64. Also, Challenger II>Abrams because squash head.

[Luna]

For this I call upon my aircraft enthusiast friend, Koby.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229
Well speaking of war changing events. The Horten Ho 229 could have won the germans the war because of it's advanced technology and stealthy features. It's engines which were buried in the body, it was painted with a semi radar absorbent material and it's shape greatly resembles the B-2 bomber which may or may not hold weight. So, had the Germans got that out and operational do you think they would have won the war?

[Iv121]

It could have helped them, but wars are not won in air, it is eventually up to the very basic soldier on the ground, only he can fully capture a territory.

@ACH I talked about the main MBTs they used. BTW did you know that by many parameters the T-90 is better than the abrams ?

T-64 and T-80 were main MBTs. T-80s were in Chechnya and there were no wars for the T-64. Also, Challenger II>Abrams because squash head.

The abrams doesn't even have proper air venting :P , its true the brits outdid the muricans in this round, in general the Europeans got better tanks, guess ever since WW2, the Leopard is not half bad either, they and some other tanks like the Merkava 4 go par to par with each other, each having their own advantage. The challenger got one hell of an armor for example, made out of multiple composite materials and having a special integral structure designed to kill the force of almost any type of shell or rocket, making this tank almost invincible. On the other hand there is one kind of shell that can possibly penetrate it - the Hypersonic HEAT shells of the Merkava 4. Those shells are special in that they don't explode immediately nor are slowed by armor, they simply pierce through anything facing them, but that’s not all - each shell got a small computer on board that compares the pressures around the shell and calculates the perfect moment for detonation, that basically means that if that shell pierces your armor you are as good as dead. Just like the challenger it is considered almost invincible, but not due to the armor but due to a special system of turrets that can destroy any kind of approaching projectiles.

[Prototype]

Not necessarily, if said fighter had been used it could have been devestating to the RAF, meaning the Germans would have been more able to attack Britain.

However it wouldn't have been enough to drive off the Russians, and they pretty much won the war for everyone.

[ACH0225]

Well, it wasn't just the RAF defending Britain, they just got the most publicity.

[Prototype]

Well, it wasn't just the RAF defending Britain, they just got the most publicity.

No but it would have made quite a difference of they had been wiped out.