If you could have stopped WWII, would you?

[Sava]

No, without WW2, it's likely that the US would not have become the first country to develop the atom bomb. The horrors of WWII are unmatched in human history. But the world is a much better place after that conflict. At least with WW2, good prevailed over evil. If WW2 didn't happen, there would have been another war. And I'm not about to roll the dice to see who the winner of that war would be.

[Main_Brain]

I second that. I know that the Germans were working on 'the Bomb' too. After all the outcome of WWII wasnt too bad. Movements to start EU (both political and also Civilian), Stability through Fear which lead to a long Perod of relativly Peaceful decades (except in Africa)

[Serb]

Kramerman,
Get ready for a long post. I love to type much while I’m drinking beer. Some points of this post sure will make you sick again, but please show some respect for guy who spent 3 hours to type this post and for whom English is the second language. Read it all.

OH MY GOD
I've never had anything Ive said blown so far out of proportion, or used so far from its context.

You never have long conversation with me. I have a talent for such things; sometimes I love to post something a bit dramatic.

Every American knows the horrors of war, especially of WWII.

You can’t know the horrors of WW2. Your country was unharmed during WW2. Your country has to go through horrors to know such things. For you, the harm done to you in Pearl Harbor is the biggest national tragedy of all times, by our standards such harm is just one day of WW2.

You are completely missing the point. If you would of stopped WWII, were so many people died, it is possible there could of been an even more destructive war, or a series of very destructive wars.

It is you (and your fellow country mans) who completely missing the point, and the one who demonstrated typical American Cowboy’s logic (First firing your gun and only after that think: “wtf was that?”), like: let’s kill Hitler or do something of that kind and we’ll stop the war.
If you want to stop something you should remove the reasons of that something, but not consequences.
The only way to stop WW2 (the first of war from series of very destructive wars you spoke about was still called WW2 even if it happen later then in 1939) is to remove REASONS for that war. And this is the only way. Not an elimination of Hitler, because if you will kill him with probability 99% Hitler2 will appear and he could be more terrible then the first one.
The WW2 had many reasons: ideology- clash between nazism, communism, imperialism and democracy; geopolitical -clash between great colonial powers and countries which wanted to become such powers, the clash between Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, SU and USA. And other reasons- economical, fight for resources and so on.
The only way to stop WW2 is to remove those reasons. ONLY THIS CAN STOP IT.
You asked a question:” If you could have stopped WWII, would you?”
I answered YES, even if it cost my life, because this question is about reasons of this war. The other question is anyone able to remove the REASONS for this war. I guess it’s impossible, but if I could remove them I’ve done it, because nothing else could stop murder of 50 millions people.
If you have asked “Would you stop WW2 if you could, but let nazism survive?”
Then I answered NO, because in that case sooner or later the war could happen anyway and probably more terrible war. And I answered no, because this question is about consequences, not about reasons.

Am I made myself understandable, now?

I dare you to go back and stop WWII, when you come back (if you are not annhylated by time paradox), you may come back to a nuclear wasteland, or place where the zipper on your pants is a thousand years ahead of the remnants of humanity. You would probably have to check your gauges twice to make sure you werent in 3000 BC.

All depends on how to stop the war, if you’ll remove consequences (like annihilation of Hitler), then yes. But if you remove the reasons (Sure I don’t know how, but if it was possible), then probably you have returned to paradise where humans live without wars and using technologies we never dreamed about.

Maybe you dont understand English sarcasm, but we were making fun of the rediculousness of those films, like John Wayne. Watch Saving Private Ryan, or Black Hawk Down if you want to see Americans get their guts shot out, fighting for their ideals of freedom and democracy.

Maybe you didn’t understand Russian anger, because all those ridiculous films were created by Americans and for Americans. Even if you after another of those films you made sarcastic comments about them, you continue to watch them, even knowing that such films are nothing more then a pieces of historically inaccurate bullsh*t. And this is what makes producers to keep making those films. And this historical inaccurate bullsh*t keeps going.

You are starting to make me sick.

Big deal You are not alone. The only American that I didn’t make sick is Arrian. He has a degree in history and his views often are “slightly” different from views of general Americans. But even he sometimes makes suggestions that I should better shut up.
Also, the war was a kick in the ass for the world economy, and the US economy in particular, if it wernt for that war, we may all still be in a depression today …

How typical for an American it is. You don’t care about MILLIONS of people who were slain on this war. Much more you care about your economy.
Sure, why should you want to change it?
This war made you a superpower. While European nations killing each other in most terrible war in human history, you become only richer and richer. If this war never happens and Europe lived in peace all those years, you’ll never be on such position as you now. You become a powerful country only because we killed millions of ourselves and burned almost to nothing our lands in this war.
When you saying that this war “was a kick in the ass for the world economy”, speak for yourselves. It was a kick in the ass for YOUR economy, for others economies it was a disaster.

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.

DO YOU THINK YOU ACTED IN DIFFERENT MANNER?
Stalin begged for your help in 1941, when he finally realized in what type of deep sh*t his shining policy of purges in Red Amy brings us. You replied- “f*ck off uncle Joseph, it’s your own problems not ours. First of all we don’t like you, and we don’t want to be involved in your showdowns”. He keeps begging, we were in very bad conditions. Soon you have realized that it’s not only our own problem (when Japan and later Germany declared war on you) and that is in your national interests to help us you’ve started to send help
But uncle Jho keeps begging for real help-“open the second front, attack them”. The reply- “f*ck off, uncle Jho you are too far away from us, we are not ready yet, we better send you another truck this is all what we can do”. And this bullsh*t continued for 3 years until 1944, when you finally realized that Germans fate is doomed and that 3rd Reich will fall very soon and if you don’t invade now the Soviets will took all Europe. And what a miracle you opened a second frond!!! Sure it’s better later then never and I’m greatly appreciated to all families of American soldiers who sacrificed their lives in war against nazism, BUT Kramerman, please stop f*cking my brains that your government do not waited while Soviets and nazi weakened them selfves. And stop this bullsh*t:
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.
If you didn’t invaded France in 1944 it didn’t make modern Russians to speak on German, but more likely it makes modern French to speak on Russian.

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.

Say to Japanese that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were for their own sake.


To be continued.
(Don’t have time now)
P.S. Enjoy your sickness.

[Boris Godunov]

For you, the harm done to you in Pearl Harbor is the biggest national tragedy of all times, by our standards such harm is just one day of WW2.

You seem to be forgetting the American Civil War, certainly our greatest national tragedy.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Kramerman


The technology would most likely not be as advanced as it is, (see above posts)

Again, can you imagine 50 millions of people dead? Now imagine- how many brilliant scientists were among them? Imagine also- how many brilliant scientists could be among their children and grandchildren.
Your claims that war is the only factor for technological progress are at least exaggeration. What all things invented by humaninty during it's history were invented in war times? NO.
If Europe wasn't burned, its industry wasn't devastated and 50 millions people survived, and there was no such wars, those people created far better society then we have now.

and this is just page one of a nine thousand page list of reasons why not to stop WWII.

Only for you. For me Internet don't worth 50 000 000 human lives.

Let History run its course.

Finally, a good idea. We can't change nothing, then why you started this thread?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


You seem to be forgetting the American Civil War, certainly our greatest national tragedy.

My mistake.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Kramerman

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.

Of course they don’t teach it in schools. Only in American schools such weird theories might have take place. Hitler lost WW2 when he invaded SU. With your help or without your help we still would won this war. And I can’t explain you why, because you call this war World War 2. We call this war- The Great Patriotic War. It’s impossible for me to explain the difference to an American.

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.

More probably they would speaking Russian. In 1944 nothing could stop Red Army in its way to Berlin. The Germany was doomed.

[Serb]

Originally posted by ravagon
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 didn’t have Stalin’s word in mind when I’ve typed this. But now, after you pointed on this… yes it’s pretty similar with his words. He said: ”When one man dead it’s a tragedy, when millions dead it’s a statistic”.

[Urban Ranger]

You forgot that you can't stop WWII by stopping WWI, because there was also Japan.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Kramerman


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.

Depression?
It was your depression, not ours. The SU wasn't in depression, he was growing.
It's for your economy war was an ‘Eldorado’, for others it was blood bath. This war makes YOU rich and only you, the others it makes very poor.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
You forgot that you can't stop WWII by stopping WWI, because there was also Japan.

I didn’t forget anything. Did I say that WW2 could be stopped if there was no WW1?
I said: I don’t know how to remove the reasons of WW2, but if (hypothetically) I could, then I’ll do it at immidiently.

[Q Classic]

WW2? i would not have stopped it. because otherwise, there would have been no potential of any outside assistance for the korean freedom fighters. you westerners didn't give a damn about the occupation until japan became a belligerent, and even then, your attention was half-assed at best.

but even so, the intervention and defeat of japan was spectacular, and necessary.

which is why i wouldn't change it, even though i really wish the nukes weren't involved.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Kramerman


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
Kman

You should look not on war damage or causalities of Britain or Russia, but on war damage and causalities of Germany. If you'll do this,, then you'll find that German causalities on Russian front it's a more then a 70% of their overall casualties in this war.

. 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

Already denied. We would win in any case. More likely the victory cost additional millions of lives for us, but we still won, no matter of your decision to join the war or not to join.

[Serb]

Originally posted by ravagon


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).

Sure it's bullsh*t and I'm a living evidence that life in Siberia is possible.

[Dan Severn]

Serb, the fact that 27 million Soviets died during WWII does not mean you could have won the war by yourself. Actually, it suggests the exact opposite. As General Patton said, "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it, by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his country." No single allied nation had the resources to overcome the Nazis and japanese on its own. And excuse me, but a government which was able to cart off 20 million of its own people to work as slave labor is not exactly the best choice for unbiased information.