Automotive Deals BOTYSFKT Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it Pink Floyd Fire TV Stick Happy Belly Coffee Ruby jewelry Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Water Sports
Customer Discussions > History forum

Interesting what if. WWII, repercussions of a Soviet collapse during the war.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 201-225 of 535 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 1:22:00 PM PDT
briefcandle says:
"In large operations, combat divisions are burning 1,000,000+ gallons of fuel per week. Imagine it in Russia. 10's of millions of gallons per day for the armies involved. That is why amateurs talk of tactics and professionals talk about logistics."
...................
By the first week of july '41 the germans had discovered growing discrepancies in their fuel supplies. They had budgeted that the war in the east would consume 2.6m gallons/day. The reality was more like 3.3m gallons/day. The first week of the war had been kind to them, with large soviet fuel dumps falling to them which actually hid the shortfall. Beyond that time 22 tanker trains were getting through a day, where approx 28 were needed.
In western europe an army might expect to advance across or close to a double track railway line all to itself-in the east army group centre had only one such line to support 3 armies and two panzer groups. Add to this the need to repair war damaged track and bridges as the advance continued.
Also in this early phase of the advance all major repair and overhauls of panzers happened in germany, so added to battle losses were the far greater 'absences' to the armoured formations due to wear and tear-which should be predictable-but was woefully catered for.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 3:23:20 PM PDT
Joseph,
If you were driving wheeled vehicles on a hard surfaced road you probable had longer range. I used to drive M35 2 1/2 tons and M52 5 Ton Dumps and our range was double or triple on roads as compared to cross country. All that crawling in low range really eats up fuel.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 4:11:21 PM PDT
brief

As boring as it sometimes is, it is minucia like that that wins wars. I think Napoleon covered it when he said god is on the side of the big battalions. The trick to to get the battalions where you need them to be.

3.3m a day. Staggering when you think about it.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 4:28:13 PM PDT
It did in Germany and Japan and then later South Korea. Those nations were rebuilt and we occupied them. Nation building does work it is HOW it is done and the WILL of the people in the occupying country that matters.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 5:15:57 PM PDT
No one from the US could get to Hiroshima on the ground on Aug 7 to look at the damage and see what radiation does. The bomb destroyed 3/5ths of the city. What was feared by military commanders was not what we fear today of them but the fact that instead of 250 bombers needed to bomb one city those 250 could destroy 250 cities and make war that much easier. These sentiment was the same when the machine gun was first introduced.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 5:20:38 PM PDT
A bombs have one nuclear reaction. Thermonukes have two a fission and a fusion explosion. It not only increases the heat blast but increases the radiation yield BUT since that yield was not high enough for some they put cobalt around it to create ANOTHER reaction that increases the radiation yield even more.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 5:26:44 PM PDT
Plus don't they treat cancer patients with radiation treatment to kill the cancer cells?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 5:54:26 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Jul 13, 2012 7:54:16 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 9:17:33 PM PDT
Germany and Japan were results of the bully complex. We totally destroyed their societies and they built new ones in our image (sort of) we didn't ram it down their throats. We helped them after they were devastated by the war. South Korea built itself, we did very little but protect them from the Kims.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 9:19:49 PM PDT
Devin,
Yes they do, the radiation is very narrowly targeted and kills the cancer just a little faster than it kills the patient. It's a very tricky balance, chemotherapy does the same thing, get the balance wrong and the patient dies.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 3:08:58 AM PDT
briefcandle says:
.....and having treated sucessfully with radiotherapy the patient has acquired a higher risk of future cancer due to that therapeutic radiation :-)

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 10:33:04 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 14, 2012 11:36:48 AM PDT
brief

"patient has acquired a higher risk of future cancer due to that therapeutic radiation "

LOL. The patient has acquired a higher risk of future cancer due to the presence of a large colony of malignant cancer cells in his/her body. Anytime you want to point to an undisputed study of comparative therapy indicating higher rates of recurrent malignancy between radiation treated patients and a control group (say chemo patients) feel free. Noting that the cross typing of cancer variants are subject to huge amounts of variance. It is one thing to quote a general newspaper article written for general public consumption and quite another to have read the papers in oncology journals and know what they say.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 10:37:08 AM PDT
Jeff Marzano says:
Devin MacGregor says:

[It not only increases the heat blast but increases the radiation yield BUT since that yield was not high enough for some they put cobalt around it to create ANOTHER reaction that increases the radiation yield even more.

Why did they feel the initial radiation amounts weren't high enough ?

Why did they want the higher release of radiation ?

Jeff Marzano

Posted on Jul 14, 2012 10:38:48 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 14, 2012 12:13:50 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 10:44:49 AM PDT
Andre Lieven says:
RG: Re Thuringia, -In February 2006, full tests on the soil at the proposed test site were released by the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), revealing no abnormal background levels of radiation after taking into account the already elevated background levels as a result of the Chernobyl accident in 1986. The PTB release emphasized that while it could not necessarily rule out a German test conclusively, that soil analysis of that site revealed absolutely no evidence of it.[1]- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitlers_Bombe

Unfortunately, the latter period of WW2 also draws many conspiracy wingnuts to it, none of whose claims hold up any better than the 9/11 wingnutters, or the Apollo never happened kooks.

Such confirmation would be interesting, but so far, all of the evidence shows that that claim is pure fiction. And, TV shows are a poor source for any useful or factual information. As an amateur military historian, I cringe just thinking about the rubbish on such channels as History Channel, et al.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 11:24:25 PM PDT
Patrick,
What you cite as reasons for Hitler's negligence in using more advanced weapons is standard political propaganda. We authors on amazon are requested not to toot our horns too much on these public forums, but let me say this. Much new material has surfaced from both Russian archives and American archives on the continuous advanced research conducted in munitions behind the scenes between the Nazis and Soviets since 1926 up through the capitulation. We won the war by a couple of weeks before their grand alliance would resurface. All parties had so many skeletons in the closet, blackmailing each-other for the next 70 years, it is beyond absurdity.

Think about George Orwell's "1984" where the world was divided between three super powers, secretly in league with each other to enslave the common man and whittle down the masses through the meat grinder of war, all in the name of POWER. Orwell was not ranked as a "conspiracy theorist" in his time, people took him seriously and understood the goals of communism as a cruel hoax. Today, the youth is duped and the lines are blurred by a new "relativism" called the Third Way - a supposed merger between capitalism and socialism couched in Orwell's "doublespeak." Everything Orwell warned of is here today.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 11:47:05 PM PDT
Smith,
You responded to Briefcandle that: "The Soviet invasion of Manchuria had nothing to do with Japan's surrender..."

How would you explain the Soviet's nonaggression pact with Japan after Zhukov's score on the Mongolian/Manchurian border, that pact held right up through the Capitulation of Germany? The opportunity for the Axis Powers to score big in Barbarossa was enormous, forcing the Kremlin to fight a battle on two fronts, yet it was not taken.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 12:37:12 AM PDT
Jeff Marzano,
You write about author Jeseph Farrell's "far out theories" on the Allies' motivation behind attacking Dresden? He had the right motive with the wrong weapons. Google the Nazis' Nebeltruppen's werfer batteries at Konigsbruck outside of Dresden.

You would enjoy reading Mary Baker Eddy's works quoting Edgar Cayce's views on contemporary medicine in the 1890s. There is a ring of truth to some of Cayce's avaunt guard ideas.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 1:15:32 AM PDT
DarthRad,
You seem to have a good history of the engagement of tank warfare between the Nazis and Soviets. Do you know off hand what model of tanks the Soviets were building in factories on the north end of Stalingrad when Field Marshal von Paulus surrendered? Just curious.

Posted on Jul 15, 2012 2:14:00 AM PDT
DarthRad says:
There was a T-34 tank factory in Stalingrad, the Stalingrad Tractor Factory. It was one of the major producers of T-34s early in the war. They were still rolling T-34s off the assembly line straight into combat, until the Germans captured it. T-34 production was then moved entirely to factories in the Ural mountains, some of which continue to produce modern Russian tanks.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 2:18:50 AM PDT
F. Gleaves says:
After Khalkin Gol, the US British and Dutch looked like a pushover compared to the Soviet Siberian Army.

Japan needed food and raw materials from Korea and Manchuria, which were being overrun by the Soviets in August cutting off most of the Japanese Army in China.

US submarines had finally developed the technology and techniques to penetrate the minefields guarding the Straits of Tsushima and Sea of Japan, but couldn't completely stop shipping quickly.

The Emperor also preferred MacArthur's terms to what he could expect from the Communists.

I think he remembered what happened to the Czar. And family.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 5:56:58 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 15, 2012 6:06:53 AM PDT
Rachel, It's simple,the Japanese learned at Kolkin Gol that they had zero chance of matching Soviet Armor and would quickly lose any offensive war aginst the Soviet Union, so they wisely avoided one. The Soviet knew they didn't have the capacity to fight a 2 front war so they avoided one. They only jumped the Japanese after the war was won and could make major territorial gains against little resistence. The cream of the Japanese Army in Manchuko had been withdrawn to fight the US forces in th e Pacific and to prepare defenses on the Home ISlands. What was left was largely a infantry force comparable to the Italians in the Western Desert. Barely mobile, poorly supplied forces incapable of serious resistance.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 6:05:21 AM PDT
Rachel,
There were no combined research projects operating after Barbarossa began. Hitler was out to conquer the Soviet Union, there was no vast conspiracy. Hitler always thought the Soviets were his real enemy, and Stalin and the Communists always believed that ALL the Capitalist West was their enemy. They both cooperated to some extent before Barbarossa since they viewed cooperation to be in their best interests, but after the invasion, it was war to the death. Hitler had no advanced weapons, and he wasn't close to getting them. He squandered enormous resources and time on pipe dreams like the E-100 and Maus panzers and the Amerika bomber and pods armed with V-2s that could be towed across the Atlantic by U-boats to attack the US when they could rarely operate without towing pods that generated noise and slowed the U-boat to a crawl submerged.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 7:11:24 AM PDT
Jeff Marzano says:
Rachel Verdon says:

[Much new material has surfaced from both Russian archives and American archives on the continuous advanced research conducted in munitions behind the scenes between the Nazis and Soviets since 1926 up through the capitulation.]

What new information has come out about this ?

What are the implications ?

Anything about the more exotic projects like the Nazi Bell ?

Jeff Marzano

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 7:18:35 AM PDT
Jeff Marzano says:
Rachel Verdon says:

[He had the right motive with the wrong weapons.]

Interesting ! You sound like you write books that are similar to Farrell's.

What were the allies really aiming for when they bombed Dresden ?

Edgar Cayce is a favorite subject of mine. I used to order most of my books directly from Cayce's ARE organization so I ended up reading a lot about him.

I don't want to say much more about Cayce since my other message got deleted. But I made a note to remember Mary Baker Eddy's works.

Jeff Marzano
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the History forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  35
Total posts:  535
Initial post:  May 31, 2012
Latest post:  Aug 3, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

Search Customer Discussions