Did the Axis have any chance at all in WWII?

[Sprayber]

I agree KH, nazi Germany seemed to exist on the next conquest. It was never going to be enough just to go with what they had at the time. What have you gotten for Germany today seemed to be Hitler's main concern.

[Goingonit]

Nobody's focusing on the axis' goals: they wanted to conquer the world - no less would suffice. They would not and could not have stopped after Poland and Manchuria - neither Japan nor Germany could run a peacetime economy with any efficiency.

So could they have conquered the world? I think everybody would agree no.

[orange]

Originally posted by Goingonit
Nobody's focusing on the axis' goals: they wanted to conquer the world - no less would suffice.

They would not and could not have stopped after Poland and Manchuria - neither Japan nor Germany could run a peacetime economy with any efficiency.

So could they have conquered the world? I think everybody would agree no.

Do you really believe that?

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Mikhail
Germans could have, if they had a smarter leader who didn't commit so many men to racist genocide. Also, Britain was losing pretty bad, Germany COULD have offered Britain peace half-way through the war, and simply kept their gained territory in Europe.

The Japanese could have won as well, if they hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor. Seriously, I doubt the US would have cared whether or not Japan controlled China. FDR would have most likely never been able to convince the US public that entering the war was a must if not for Pearl Harbor.

The US did care about China, that's why we cut the Japanese supply of American oil and iron off. It was known that their oil reserves would reach a critical low in 18 months. They believed that they could survive if they took the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies, but realized that they couldn't leave the Phillipines in US hands because the US could completely block off the Dutch East Indies with airpower alone.

[Cavalcadeus]

Germany could of taken England if Hitler had allowed the German army to destroy the BEF at Dunkirk instead of stopping it and letting the Luftwaffe attempt to destroy it. Then using the Luftwaffe's numerical advantage to capture the airspace above the English Channel and Southern England, airborne landings could capture Southern English port cities and pave the way for seaborne landings of the German army. With almost no professional army or weapons England couldn't hold out for long.

With England eliminated the United States would not be able to stage seaborne landings across the Atlantic. The bulk of the German army could be focused against any pockets f British resistance in the Mediteranian Sea or the Middle East.

Germany could then focus the bulk of its forces against the USSR. Combined with Japanese landing in the East the USSR would have collapsed. Although a large amount of forces would have to be used to keep Russia under control, Germany and Japan would have a free hand to act in Europe, Asia and Africa.

The Axis probably wouldn't be able to invade North America. Germany and Japan would also probably end up fighting since the Japanese aren't part of the "master race".

I'm glad that Hitler was a dumba$$.

[Faeelin]

No.

1)insufficient industry. The USA produced more weapons than the entire axis COMBINED.

2) Insufficient consolidation. China wasn't worth it for Japan, and they never exploited the territories they conquered for the resources they needed (oil in the dutch territories) sufficiently.

3) Weak allies.
Finland/Italy, etc.

[Goingonit]

Originally posted by orange
Do you really believe that?

I do believe that much like the Soviet Union, their command economies would grind to a screeching halt when they actually had to deal with producing more than war materiel.

And their propoganda would be rather impotent in peacetime - they would lose the control of the state that can be achieved during war.

[orange]

Originally posted by Goingonit
I do believe that much like the Soviet Union, their command economies would grind to a screeching halt when they actually had to deal with producing more than war materiel.

And their propoganda would be rather impotent in peacetime - they would lose the control of the state that can be achieved during war.

That's not the issue. Do you really think that Germany and Japan wanted to take over the world? - that's the issue.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by orange


That's not the issue. Do you really think that Germany and Japan wanted to take over the world? - that's the issue.

I think Hitler had masturbatory fantasies about it. It would have been impracticable to say the least. Remember that he balked at invading even England...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Sprayber
I agree KH, nazi Germany seemed to exist on the next conquest. It was never going to be enough just to go with what they had at the time. What have you gotten for Germany today seemed to be Hitler's main concern.

Same way with most world-conquerors. Invasion after invasion. When the booty stops flowing in, the centre falls apart. Classic example is Napoleon.

[Goingonit]

Originally posted by orange
That's not the issue. Do you really think that Germany and Japan wanted to take over the world? - that's the issue.

Doesn't everybody want to?

I think Japan would have been fine with capturing enough resources to maintain an industrial economy, but Hitler did IMO believe in the whole "master race" bit, and his goal was probably the world.

[orange]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I think Hitler had masturbatory fantasies about it. It would have been impracticable to say the least. Remember that he balked at invading even England...

Yes, one of many very, very odd sexual fantasies Hitler had

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by UberKruX
I've actually discussed this with my boss (he served in ww2, grunt) and he claimed that the Germans (or as he called them, "Krauts") had America "Out gunned, Out manned, and Outthought".

the out gunned part is sinmple to understand, German weaponry gave Germany a slight edge. Out manned didnt seem right to me, but he claims that in all the action he's seen, the Krauts had more men then expected / wanted. as for "out thought", i uppose he's talkign about Rommel and the Gang, but i'm not quite sure.

Overall, i think Germany had a good shot at winning their side of ww2, England was a formidable foe, and America pushed them over the edge. My Grandfather, who also served in ww2 said "The Germans Messed Up Big Time, and We Capitialized on Their Mistakes". i'm not sure what he's referring to, but i'm only a minor ww2 buff.

another way germany could have won would have been if they left russia alone for a while longer, although the US probably would have pushed russia to attack germany anyway.

on the japanese front, I think they had an extremely good shot at winning. if you ignore the nukes on hiro - naga, the Japanese were actually doing rather well for most of the war. The American "Island Hopping" strategy was slow comming. The japanese could have taken all of southeast asia, and mayeb a chunk of russia, but BOTH sides of the war are directly influenced by the other.

Germany had better tanks, but the US negated that edge with better airplanes. While it would appear logical that German jets might have bested allied air power, the fuel situation was such that the widespread deployment of jets would have wordsened Germany's strategic position. They literally had a choice between having Tiger tanks to keep the Russians at bay vs. having jets to fight allied ari power. Gemany had better machine guns, but the American semiautomatic rifle was better than German bolt action Mauser. The German assault rifle was not issued widely enough to make a difference. American artillery, as used in the American system, was without question the best in the war.

By D-day the Germans definiely did not have the US outmanned, at least not on the western front. You have to take into consideration that a significant number of western front troops were actually prisoners and work units, some of which were more dangerous to their officers than to the allies.

Germany couldn't leave Russia alone, the Russian were out producing and out modernizing the Germans in weaponry by 1941, and the effect of Stalin's army purges was being allieviated as new officers were being trained. The high command felt that they could not wait even one year.

Germany could have preparesd for winter war. They could have at least made winter uniforms for the troops. If they could have just halved their losses to frost bite in the winter of '41-'42 they might have been able to meet their objectives in the '42 offensive. That's still not saying that they would have put Russia out of the war.

[KrazyHorse]

Yes, one of many very, very odd sexual fantasies Hitler had

Actually, he was apparently a bit of a prude. He shared that and his anti-semitism with Canada's WWII leader. Might have been why they got along famously when they met in '36 or '37.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Goingonit


Doesn't everybody want to?

I think Japan would have been fine with capturing enough resources to maintain an industrial economy, but Hitler did IMO believe in the whole "master race" bit, and his goal was probably the world.

Japan had the "Tanaka Plan", an elaborate blueprint for imposing Japanese civilization on the whole world. The basic idea was to capture China, which would supply the manpower. The Japanese were then to sail east to the US, whose conquest would supply the resources. With the manpower of China and the resources of the US the rest of the world would be a cakewalk.

[KrazyHorse]

I know about the Tanaka Plan from the WWII USArmy propaganda films I own...

The most memorable quote in them was when they referred to the Japanese as "bandy-legged Nips".

[orange]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Quote:

Yes, one of many very, very odd sexual fantasies Hitler had

Actually, he was apparently a bit of a prude. He shared that and his anti-semitism with Canada's WWII leader. Might have been why they got along famously when they met in '36 or '37.

Prude in what sense? He got off on his niece's urination...

[KrazyHorse]

Did he? I meant more like in the repressed sense...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Prude in what sense?

He wasn't into sex. His relationship with Eva Braun was apparently a sexless one.

[orange]

yeah, but his idea of sexual pleasure deviated a lot from what the normal guy's idea of sexual pleasure is...

futher proof the guy was off his nut, if the whole German superiority death to jews thing doesn't convince you

[Imran Siddiqui]

futher proof the guy was off his nut, if the whole German superiority death to jews thing doesn't convince you

That was a sexual fantasy too?

[KrazyHorse]

Canada's PM (RT. Hon. William Lyon Mackenzie King) was also into the occult, and apparently talked to his dead mother and dog...

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I know about the Tanaka Plan from the WWII USArmy propaganda films I own...

The most memorable quote in them was when they referred to the Japanese as "bandy-legged Nips".

Many of the Japanese Imperial Army's officers actually were bandy-legged. Kids were taken from home at age ten and subjected to a grueling training that included starvation right at the time that their bodies most needed nutrition to grow. Japanese officers tended to be on the average significantly shorter than their enlisted men, and many of them even had rickets of malnutrition.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
You don't need that much shipping, as long as you can protect it. The distance is short enough that you can make multiple trips every day. Grab a beachhead with 25-30 000 troops, go back, get more...

I don't think it would have succeeded, but it was Hitler's best chance of getting across the Channel.

The point is the Luftwaffe was the protection. And the artillery as the invasion force was not going to have any. River barges on the English Channel meant they had to have good weather. 25-30,000 troops is a lot men and a lot of barges. The barges moved at less than five knots. They were going to need good weather just to get accross the channel once in the morning. After that the water gets rougher through out the day even in nicer water than the Channel.

They had no plans for a landing heavy stuff untill they took a port. With light troops only. No artillery and no tanks. Sea Lion was little more than a bluff.

[Jack_www]

I remember watching program on the History Channel about the plans that Japan and Germany had on taking over the world. Germany would push through Russia, into Asia, while Japan would go through China and would meet up with each other. Germany also wanted Japan to fight Russia as well, but Japan had a small conflict with Russia before WWII and were defeated, so they feared having another conflict with Russia, especially since Russia had much greator industrail compacity when comparred to Japan, so they signed a peace treaty with Russia. Japan actually wanted to bring Russia into the war on there side, but Germany did not want to. But I think that this would have been there best chance. Also Germany had a mutual defense pact with Japan, and they did not have to declare war on the US when US declared war on Japan, because Japan had attacked first, but Hittler decided to do this anyways. But with just Germany, Japan, and Italy against two industrail powers U.S and Russia, with Britain helping out and providing land bases close to Germany, they had no chance. Also Japan and Germany were never able to take the war to the US, and take out there industrail capacity, thus they could keep producing weapons non stop, while Germany and Japan's industry was being destroyed by bombing and thus their weapons output fell.

[KrazyHorse]

Japan had a small conflict with Russia before WWII and were defeated

When?

[orange]

Russo-Japanese war? That was a Japanese victory

[David James]

Hitler's goal, remember, was not so much world domination or even wiping out the Jews (shipping them to Madagascar would have been enough). What he wanted was Lebensraum in Eastern Europe and Russia. So anything that detracted from *that* goal is what one has to look at, and so Operation Barbarossa can hardly be called a mistake.

The biggest mistake was pointlessly invading Northern and Western Europe, especially with no plan to invade England. If he had had any brains he would have just spent 1940 building up his army and fortifying the Rhineland (the Siegfried Line). The British and French public would just have gotten bored with the war and Hitler would have been free to invade Russia in the East the following year (when he did). It's not like Britain and France were going to come to the aid of Communist Russia; Britain had in fact supplied weapons to Finland to help them fight Russia in the 1939-40 Winter War (as had Germany). Not invading Western Europe would have freed up more than enough personnel from garrison duty to allow a successful invasion whilst a heavily fortified Rhineland would deter any inclination the British and French would have had for attacking Germany. Also not getting tangled up sorting out the mess the Italians created in Southern Europe couldn't have hurt either.

But that's just my view...

[orange]

Originally posted by David James
Hitler's goal, remember, was not so much world domination or even wiping out the Jews (shipping them to Madagascar would have been enough). What he wanted was Lebensraum in Eastern Europe and Russia. So anything that detracted from *that* goal is what one has to look at, and so Operation Barbarossa can hardly be called a mistake.

The biggest mistake was pointlessly invading Northern and Western Europe, especially with no plan to invade England. If he had had any brains he would have just spent 1940 building up his army and fortifying the Rhineland (the Siegfried Line). The British and French public would just have gotten bored with the war and Hitler would have been free to invade Russia in the East the following year (when he did). It's not like Britain and France were going to come to the aid of Communist Russia; Britain had in fact supplied weapons to Finland to help them fight Russia in the 1939-40 Winter War (as had Germany). Not invading Western Europe would have freed up more than enough personnel from garrison duty to allow a successful invasion whilst a heavily fortified Rhineland would deter any inclination the British and French would have had for attacking Germany. Also not getting tangled up sorting out the mess the Italians created in Southern Europe couldn't have hurt either.

But that's just my view...

hmmm, not sure I follow this...

his easiest gains were in northern and western Europe. And barbarossa was possibly his greatest blunder of the war.

I think we've established that Germany could not have defeated England, at least, not taken it over with land forces...no chance.

[orange]

by the way who are you? did you do a name change? Dec 1969?