If you could have stopped WWII, would you?

[Az]

yes, I would have prevented it. Science would develop anyway, and probably at even a faster rate.

[Kramerman]

Maybe in WWII, the US and Britain should of just waited for Hitler to kick Eastern Europe's and Russia's ass and then invade on the Western front. That would of saved us the trouble of the Cold War, as Communism would of been dismantled by Hitler. And also perhaps you fellas would maybe appreciate the war effort and sacrifice America gave in that war after spending sometime under a Nazi boot. We didnt have to help in Europe you know, it was Japan that bombed us after all, not Germany.

Kman

400000 American casualties, and it could of been a million, though thanks to the tech boost of the war effort, we were able to develope the atomic bomb and break Japans war spirit. They had pledged, the entire 100 million civilian population, to defend their empreror to the death, America was comitted and willing to fight to an unconditional victory. A couple nukes saved American lives, unfortunately at the expense of Japanese. Though a land invasion, if all 100000000 Japs would of stuk to their word, the Jpanese death taoll would of been much higher.

[Az]

errm, Kramerman, I guess they don't teach that in american schools, but Hitler first invaded the Western Front, and fought the English much earlier than the Russians. remember Dankirk?

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
yes, I would have prevented it. Science would develop anyway, and probably at even a faster rate.

The technology would most likely not be as advanced as it is, (see above posts) and this is just page one of a nine thousand page list of reasons why not to stop WWII.
From reading your signature line, I gather you are either Jewish, or a Jewish sympathizer. I could most understand why you would want to prevent the war. I mean, 7 million Jews would still be alive (theoretically) and Israel probably wouldnt have been created (because it didnt have the sentiment of the holocust behind it). This, could be viewed as positive, with out Israel the middle east could be less turmultuous, or maybe their attention would just shift someplace else. Israel's exsistance could be good or bad, depending on how you think through the cause and effect of history.
Who knows?
Let History run its course.

Kman

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
errm, Kramerman, I guess they don't teach that in american schools, but Hitler first invaded the Western Front, and fought the English much earlier than the Russians. remember Dankirk?

UHH, REMEBER A THING CALLED THE BATTLE OF BRITAIN, THE WESTERN FRONT FOUGHT OFF THE NAZI INVASION! Hitler failed on the western front and switched to a defensive war, putting Rommel incharge of defences. In the mean time he pressed his offensive into Russia. It was only Western strategic bombing that kept Hitler from completely overrunning the Eastern front. But I guess they dont teach you this in... err... where evr your from.

P.S. I dont like to be cruel, but I feel forced to after my intellegence is insulted.

EDIT: And then it was the reopened western front after D-Day that pretty much garunteed Eastern Europes liberation form Nazi Germany (but they pretty much just lept from the pot into the kettle, with Soviet puppet states being set up shortly after the war. It would be many decades before these countries were truly liberated). If the D-Day invasion would of been held off for another year and strategic bombing had been suspended, who knows what would of happened on the eastern front - but i have a good idea - they would probably be speaking german.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by paiktis22
but the most important thing would be to get my country out and far away from piss matches played by england france and germany

**** them all

You're thinking exactly the same way that a lot of the "neutrals" thought before the start of the war in Europe. End result? They were flattened by the axis. Same thing would have happened to Greece whether or not they supported the allies. At least Greece tried. Exposed the vulnerabilities in the Italian forces too. This certainly wasn't a wasted effort.

When single American is dead it's a national tragedy for them. When millions of foreigners died, it's just a cool show for them.

Now theres a good way to make a point. Quote Joseph Stalin, who eliminated more Russians than the Nazis did. It took him 20 years longer mind you ...


I would have stopped it, but only up to a point. There are lines that cannot be crossed. Hitler crossed them. The world could be a much much worse place than it is now if WW2 hadn't been fought.

[Az]

damn. you're so easily trolled.

Maybe in WWII, the US and Britain should of just waited for Hitler to kick Eastern Europe's and Russia's ass and then invade on the Western front

as you've wrote above, you claim that Britain and the US could just sit the war through . One could theoretically claim that for the US, but certainly not for Britain, that didn't enter the war, just because it wanted to help "the commies".

and I find it rather amusing that americans feel as they were the only ones that won the war, with the help of some , of course , but largely by themselves.

I saw the previous posts. It's strange that people ignore the fact that the war didn't just cause encreased scientific development , but also terribly damaged the economical fabric of the world, and lots of it's human resources in the field of science. The increased relative scientific development was promoted to compensate the fact that the overall economy was in a rather poor state, due to the war, and pre-war conditions. In short , scientific progress was a side effect of that war , while it would have been a natural produce of a peaceful human society in that time.

[Az]

who eliminated more Russians than the Nazis did.

that's not true. ( oh , **** , I am defending Stalin. )

[Kramerman]

and I find it rather amusing that americans feel as they were the only ones that won the war, with the help of some , of course , but largely by themselves.

Perhaps im not being clear, or you are just misunderstanding me.
I do feel that the US was the deciding factor in the war. Is it not true? Britain, and Russia both had a major hand in the war effort by taking most of the war damage and casualties (especially Russia), along with smaller roles of French and Polish resistance and other nations resisting Nazi Germany. But, Germany would have won if it werent for the US. Again, thats not saying we won the war all by ouselves, it is merely saying that we tipped the scale in the Ally's favor. Try to deny this fact, please

Kman

[ravagon]

that's not true. ( oh , **** , I am defending Stalin. )

Actually it is true. If you include those sent to Siberia (ie: basically to their deaths) over his reign the total is supposed to come to something like 40 million dead (Actually that includes citizens from the rest of the SSR as well as Russia).

[Kramerman]

but also terribly damaged the economical fabric of the world, and lots of it's human resources in the field of science.

WHAT!?
The war ripped the world out of depression like a screaming fetus. Also, almost all those of intellegence and education were working safely behind enemy lines designing better weapons and the technology needed to make and produce them. Germany had its rocket scientists, Russia its tank designers, UK and America their nuclear physists. It was the war effort that pumped billions of various government dollars into there respected fields of work. Had the war not been there, the depression would have. It would of been unknown number of years before these researchers would have gotten the type of funding that they got during the war.

[Main_Brain]

The Great War (WWI) leaded to the Fall of almost all Monarchs still left in Europe.. The Czar, the Kaiser, the Austrian-Hungarian Emperor etc.


Oh and

THE WESTERN FRONT FOUGHT OFF THE NAZI INVASION

.. it was the bad weather that forbid the Invasion of the English Isle.. oh and that the Germans had no Air Superiority 'prolly helped too

[Kramerman]

.. it was the bad weather that forbid the Invasion of the English Isle.. oh and that the Germans had no Air Superiority 'prolly helped too

Yes, non the less, my point was that the western front succeded in stopping Hitlers drive (even with a little help from mother nature, it doesnt take that fact away. There was bad weather on D-Day too), while he was still pushing east. And if not for the pressure of the western front, the east would have fallen to Hitler.

Kman

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Dan Severn


Good point. Space Travel, Computers, synthetic fibers, microwave ovens, radar... We might never have had them.

America wouldn't have had space travel, but Germany sure would.

[Boris Godunov]

Good ol' Werner von Braun.

Look, we have no way of knowing that, had WWII been prevented, things wouldn't have ended up WORSE for millions more people. What if the result of stopping it is a nuclear war and the annhilation of the human race?

Bottom line: Don't mess with history. There's no way to predict what the outcomes of changing it would be with any accuracy, and you could easily make things much, much worse.