1v1, Britain wouldn't have stood a chance with Germany in WW2. Not sure the US would've either, but we had a few thousand miles of ocean to protect us.jord wrote:
Arguably Yes, but that's a hypothetical situation. Britain was still considered one of the power 3 back then. The amount of resources it would take to capture Britain, if it could be done would be huge. So we wouldn't be speaking German.B.Schuss wrote:
As far as the 20th century is concerned, in the first half it was clearly us, the german army. The Wehrmacht defeated basically every european nation, and was only stopped because of a crazy leader ( Hitler ), the economic, logistic and military power of the US, and the fact that russia was willing to sacrifice millions of their own people. If it hadn't been for that, all of europe would be speaking german now.
Alexander the Great and his army. look at his record.
The feudal array of knights in France, considered itself the pinnacle of military sophistication, but was in reality, little more than an armed mob*Lai wrote:
What about French feudal knights before the invention of longbow tactics: sheer invulnerability,..
The longbow has existed before the Welsh. In fact, Richard the Lionheart(mid-late 12th century) had such an arm for his archers, but only in very small numbers, so it's always been in armies.
*Taken from C.W.C. Oman: The Art of War in the Medieval Ages
U.S. ARMY SPECIAL FORCES
De Oppreso Liber
De Oppreso Liber
The_Mac wrote:
The feudal array of knights in France, considered itself the pinnacle of military sophistication, but was in reality, little more than an armed mob*Lai wrote:
What about French feudal knights before the invention of longbow tactics: sheer invulnerability,..
The longbow has existed before the Welsh. In fact, Richard the Lionheart(mid-late 12th century) had such an arm for his archers, but only in very small numbers, so it's always been in armies.
*Taken from C.W.C. Oman: The Art of War in the Medieval Ages
Last edited by Lai (2008-02-03 02:04:32)
not really, I am afraid. Without US support and, and under the condition that the pact with Stalin had been upheld, Britain's chances would have been slim. All those ressources that we wasted on the eastern front could have been mobilized against Britain. 3-4 million soldiers. Thousands of tanks and airplanes. Also, we would have had very short supply lines, compared to Britain.jord wrote:
Arguably Yes, but that's a hypothetical situation. Britain was still considered one of the power 3 back then. The amount of resources it would take to capture Britain, if it could be done would be huge. So we wouldn't be speaking German.B.Schuss wrote:
As far as the 20th century is concerned, in the first half it was clearly us, the german army. The Wehrmacht defeated basically every european nation, and was only stopped because of a crazy leader ( Hitler ), the economic, logistic and military power of the US, and the fact that russia was willing to sacrifice millions of their own people. If it hadn't been for that, all of europe would be speaking german now.
oh well, it's all speculation anyway.
Stalin was on militarizing the border expecting conflict. Ive read that Stalin even planned on invading Germany before Germany invaded.
I'm doing about Stalin and the USSR next in History, so if I can I'll try and confirm that .GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Stalin was on militarizing the border expecting conflict. Ive read that Stalin even planned on invading Germany before Germany invaded.
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/script … plans.htmlM.O.A.B wrote:
I'm doing about Stalin and the USSR next in History, so if I can I'll try and confirm that .GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Stalin was on militarizing the border expecting conflict. Ive read that Stalin even planned on invading Germany before Germany invaded.
"Stalin explained, as Khrushchev later recalled, that he considered war with Germany unavoidable, but had momentarily tricked Hitler and bought time. The Soviet premier described the treaty with Germany as a game of "who outwits whom."3 He concluded that the Soviet Union held the advantage both morally and militarily. A few months later, the Soviet Foreign Office explained Stalin's decision in a telegram to its embassy in Tokyo: "The ratifying of our treaty with Germany was dictated by the need for a war in Europe."
No need for the confirmation then lol .GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/script … plans.htmlM.O.A.B wrote:
I'm doing about Stalin and the USSR next in History, so if I can I'll try and confirm that .GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Stalin was on militarizing the border expecting conflict. Ive read that Stalin even planned on invading Germany before Germany invaded.
"Stalin explained, as Khrushchev later recalled, that he considered war with Germany unavoidable, but had momentarily tricked Hitler and bought time. The Soviet premier described the treaty with Germany as a game of "who outwits whom."3 He concluded that the Soviet Union held the advantage both morally and militarily. A few months later, the Soviet Foreign Office explained Stalin's decision in a telegram to its embassy in Tokyo: "The ratifying of our treaty with Germany was dictated by the need for a war in Europe."
Was doing about how Stalin was having loads of his generals killed the other day, which weakened the leadership at the start of the war, hence all the running into bullets without guns etc.
Stalin knew that the Nazis didn't like communists. He also didn't want a facist Europe right next to him with no allies around. Stalin had planned on attacking before the war was over, but Hitler obviously did it first. Even with the German military resources split, the Soviets had a hard time repelling Hitler. Stalin knew that his country would not be able to repel the full weight of the Germans.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Stalin was on militarizing the border expecting conflict. Ive read that Stalin even planned on invading Germany before Germany invaded.
As far as I remember, that is.
To be fair, little or no US soldiers actually fought there. Just rebels.CameronPoe wrote:
They then managed to repel the US Bay of Pigs invasion.
they were all cubans and nicaraguans. it was also repelled with a navy task force off the coast remaining idle under orders from JFKkylef wrote:
To be fair, little or no US soldiers actually fought there. Just rebels.CameronPoe wrote:
They then managed to repel the US Bay of Pigs invasion.
U.S. Marine Corps
Last edited by Bradt3hleader (2008-02-04 02:02:26)