View Poll Results: Who contributed more to the defeat of Hitler's Germany ??

Voters
40. You may not vote on this poll
  • USA

    14 35.00%
  • Russia

    14 35.00%
  • British Empire

    7 17.50%
  • Who cares ???

    4 10.00%
  • Who was Hitler ?????

    1 2.50%

Who contributed most to the defeat of Fascist Germany ??

This is a discussion on Who contributed most to the defeat of Fascist Germany ?? within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally posted by tim545666 When USA came to Europe in WWII, France was out of the war, leaving England and ...

  1. #121
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    Originally posted by tim545666
    When USA came to Europe in WWII, France was out of the war, leaving England and the Soviets (who were weak at the time) to fight against Italy, Japan, Finland, and Germany. When we landed in Franceon D-day, we were fighting Germans on a French beach. We were the ones who first got across the Rhine. I'm not going to say that we singlehandedly won the war, but we did play a significant part. To say that we came when the war was already won is an ignorant statement.
    >>the Soviets(who were weak at the time)

    WEAK....WEAK!!!!!???????......go get a history book !!!!!!
    there was nothing weak about them!!

    >>Italy, Japan, Finland, and Germany
    & rumania & bulgaria

    >>finland
    the allies didn't fight Finland, the Finns were ONLY fighting the Russuians, and only to regain territory the USSR had stolen in the USSR-Finland war just b4 WW2

    >>crossed the Rhine
    don't hold that up as any kind of example, that was just circumstance
    Steve

  2. #122
    eat my shorts!
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    294
    /*no content, deleted. -nv, mod*/

  3. #123
    Seņor Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    561
    >>crossed the Rhine
    don't hold that up as any kind of example, that was just circumstance
    What do you mean? That was one of the Major objectives towards the end of the war.


    >>the Soviets(who were weak at the time)

    WEAK....WEAK!!!!!???????......go get a history book !!!!!!
    there was nothing weak about them!!
    Militarily I thought they were not ready to fight, I guess I missed something when I was tuning out during class on tuesday.

  4. #124
    eat my shorts!
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    294
    /*no content, deleted. -nv, mod*/

  5. #125
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    Originally posted by tim545666

    Actually Prime Minister Chamberlain respected Hitler. At the time Britain entered the war, concentration camps were not yet death camps, they were just internment camps. America shamefully did the same with the Japanese and no one declared war on them. It was not a moral war; England did it because they have always, and will always have the fear of a unified mainland Europe. England would have been worse off with Germany winning the war, because Germany would then be able to conquer England. They did it for their own good. America also did not join the war because of the holocaust. Many people didn't even know that the concentration camps existed at the time, and few knew how cruel they were and how large this genocide actually was. This is due to the nazi propaganda; the government controlled the press so little information got out about the camps to other countries.
    there was a lot of sympathy for Hitler all over Europe b4 the war, but it's becos his true nature wasn't seen. yes, it was about Germany dominating Europe but also it WAS a moral war. ie we could have made peace when Britain stood all alone for a year. Churchill especially, refused to give in..he said if we stand up to Hitler it will be the best thing the British ever did...

    Germany couldn't defeat the RAF and could never invade Britain after losing the Battle of Britain. The Royal Navy was also the 2nd biggest in the world....most historians think it would have been EXTREMELY difficult if not well nigh impossible, and would take 2 years planning, by which time about 2 million British soldiers would have been waiting for any invading Germans. don't forget D-day took 2 years of planning and total air and sea superiority, and 'enigma' telling us what the Germans were thinking and planning.

    but the point is not that, it is that Hitler never wanted to invade Britain at all. he wanted to preserve the British Empire, he admired it. he didn't want to fight Britain. so it would have been very easy for Britain/Germany to come to some arrangement, trading partnership etc. it is probable that Britain would have been better off doing that, than exausting ourselves in another long war, which we couldn't really afford. (not that i think we should have made peace). If we had made peace the USA would not have been fighting Hitler, it woould have been impossible without the British isle as a massive aircraft carrier. it would have just been Germany/ Soviet war.
    Steve

  6. #126
    Seņor Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    561
    Germany couldn't defeat the RAF and could never invade Britain after losing the Battle of Britain.
    If British didn't join in, Germany probably would have been able to conquer mainland Europe. They would then have recources to be able to surpass England's navy/air force. Hitler would not be able to be stopped after he conquered the mainland. But as it stood then, you are correct. And you said something about him respecting the British Empire-he lost that respect after the Munich Conference and called the english spineless worms. He also started losing respect for Mussolini. His ego reminds me of Napolean's, but Hitler was too stubborn, he didn't retreat and didn't listed to his generals. He was also too reckless. Was it not for his stubbornness, we might have all ben German today, because he could have gained Britian as an ally. But his ego was too large and he had a crappy foreign minister. Hitler could have taken over the world.

  7. #127
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    Originally posted by tim545666

    What do you mean? That was one of the Major objectives towards the end of the war.

    >>>>course, but the British crossed too !! just a bit later, but it could have been sooner if Eisenhower wanted it that way. we were allies, not in a race !! thats what i meant

    Militarily I thought they were not ready to fight, I guess I missed something when I was tuning out during class on tuesday.
    no, you ask your teacher how weak the Soviets were !!
    they fought the German, Rumanian, Bulgarian, Hungarian (whoops forgot them earlier),Finnish, and an Italian army from
    June 1941 to june 1944 all on their own !! of course Hitler had to keep some troops in the WEST but the large majority were in the EAST.
    but the USA sent the food to keep the RED army fed, and 2/3 of all trucks/jeeps/half tracks etc were US and British(vast majority US), allowing them to concentrate on making tanks and planes - this aid was a massive contribution to them. thousands of British sailors died taking it to them across the Baltic......they would have suffered appallingly without this aid, but i still feel Hitler may not have won even fighting just the Soviets...and to call em weak, well sorry but thats just weak !!
    Steve

  8. #128
    Seņor Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    561
    I stand corrected

  9. #129
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    >>>If British didn't join in, Germany probably would have been able to conquer mainland Europe. They would then have recources to be able to surpass England's navy/air force.

    yeah, but it takes years to build a navy, and with far better RADAR and air fields at home (big advantage - ie British planes shot down or mechanical failure - British pilot parachutes back home not into a POW camp) we would probably prevail.
    it was touch and go briefly during the Battle Of Britain, but after that the Luftwaffe couldnt beat the RAF.....
    and its such a small island, also with difficult beaches etc, and at least 2 million British and commonweath troops waiting......naaaa i don't think Hitler would have tried it......

    don't forget, we were NOT on our own, the USA was doing EVERTHING to help bar actually fighting...by the time Hitler could have arranged an invasion force, there would have been 30,000 Sherman tanks waiting for him !!

    i don't think you appreciate how difficult a sea borne invasion is.....the British/canadians had a practice at Dieppe and it was a balls-up, the allies landed in africa and sicily and italy which was good practice, and even then D day nearly failed don't forget

    but its all hypothetical, it is a FACT that Hitler did not wish to destroy the Brit empire until we'd ........ed him off later !!!
    Steve

  10. #130
    Seņor Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    561
    >>but its all hypothetical, it is a FACT that Hitler did not wish to destroy the Brit empire until we'd ........ed him off later !!!

    Nah, he would destroy Britian as soon as he had finished off his other objectives. He loved war and glory. He would not stop until the whole world was his. It doesn't matter if they ........ed him off. Remember what he did to the Czechs?

  11. #131
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    Originally posted by dayknight
    /*no content, deleted. -nv, mod*/
    is this worthy of a reply ????
    well.....

    all countries need a reason to lose their citizens in a 'foreign' war.
    the USA (major credit to Roosevelt) did everything to help the British and Soviets bar actual fighting.

    and they didn't join in the last year of the war, there were US troops fighting in Africa in 1942. into sicily and italy in 1943...then france in 1944. an invasion of France earlier than 1944 was not feasable (much to the Soviets dismay)

    but why do i even bother replying, can't the MODS get rid of this idiot ???????
    Steve

  12. #132
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    Originally posted by tim545666
    >>but its all hypothetical, it is a FACT that Hitler did not wish to destroy the Brit empire until we'd ........ed him off later !!!

    Nah, he would destroy Britian as soon as he had finished off his other objectives. He loved war and glory. He would not stop until the whole world was his. It doesn't matter if they ........ed him off. Remember what he did to the Czechs?
    well you can't deal with insane people !!! but its hard to get across the English channel, and he was far more interested in attacking eastwards than attacking us......but we were in a bad position until after the Battle of Britain...but after winning that it was always going to be very very difficult to invade Britain, we were rearming at an exponential rate, it had to be an invasion in 1940 or not at all......
    i still think it would have taken at least 1 year to even try to invade.....Britain would have been the most densely defended isleland in history by then.....we'd have had 10,000 sherman tanks (i was exagerating a bit previously !!) thanx to you guys, and 5,000 British made tanks etc too

    i think you underestimate the British....."we will fight them on the beaches, in the hills and on the landing grounds....we will NEVER surrender !!!!" (winston churchill)
    Steve

  13. #133
    Unregistered
    Guest
    I'm afraid I disagree about the Soviets. The Soviets were with the Germans until the Germans attacked them. The Germans were getting fuel (if I remember right) from the soviets Railroads.

    The Soviets weren't well equipped but stalin just sent his soldiers foward to crush the enemy with sheer numbers. The only reason the Soviets attacked was 1. To gain their land back 2. To expand their country.

    Soviets didn't help defeat Germany, Germany defeated themselves by attacking on too many fronts.

  14. #134
    the hat of redundancy hat nvoigt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Hannover, Germany
    Posts
    3,139
    >that vote is very wrong change it mod

    This is a vote ! What shall I do ? Change it ? Very funny, what country do you come from, China ?


    >but why do i even bother replying, can't the MODS get rid of this idiot ???????

    Yes, we can. But only if you give us a choice. We are here in our sparetime, and don't read all 150 posts in a thread. If you think something is offensive, report it.
    hth
    -nv

    She was so Blonde, she spent 20 minutes looking at the orange juice can because it said "Concentrate."

    When in doubt, read the FAQ.
    Then ask a smart question.

  15. #135
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    Originally posted by Unregistered
    I'm afraid I disagree about the Soviets. The Soviets were with the Germans until the Germans attacked them. The Germans were getting fuel (if I remember right) from the soviets Railroads.

    The Soviets weren't well equipped but stalin just sent his soldiers foward to crush the enemy with sheer numbers. The only reason the Soviets attacked was 1. To gain their land back 2. To expand their country.

    Soviets didn't help defeat Germany, Germany defeated themselves by attacking on too many fronts.
    yes Stalin never wanted to fight Hitler, they had a non-agression pact, and Stalin was supplying Hitler whilst Hitler was attacking Britain and the West.
    Stalin was absolutely shell-shocked when the German's attacked, he wasn't expecting it at all. the British tried to warn him, but he thought it was a ploy to drag him into the war.
    The Soviets were in the war only because they were attacked, and the USA and Britain only helped the Soviets because we needed them against Hitler. Stalin was the lesser of two evils.
    (and only just, in my opinion)
    Once the Soviets gained the upper hand, they saw the opportunity to take over Eastern Europe, which was very sad. i especially feel very very sorry for the Poles, but the truth is the Western Allies couldn't do anything about it. the Red Army was MASSIVE.
    the Soviets were ill prepared for the German onslaught, but managed to survive and soon recovered, and were actually on the offensive by late 1941, early 1942. yes shear weight of numbers was a crucial factor, but also sheer weight of tanks/planes etc. the Soviets built some 100,000 tanks and 100,000 aircraft in the war.and these tanks (mainly t-34) and planes (probably the best ground attack planes were Soviets) were among the best equipment used by any army in the war. their machine guns and rifles also some of the best. the German troops used to swap their machine guns for Russian ones when they could !!)
    not well equiped eh ???
    the fact that the Germans held out so long against them was a remarkable achievement and shows just how good the German Army was.....

    the Soviets didn't help defeat Germany ?? have you never heard of Stalingrad, Kursk etc
    Steve

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. School Shooting in Germany
    By Golden Bunny in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-27-2002, 01:47 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21