At what point did German defeat in WW2 become inevitable?

[MRT144]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


You don't know how close we were to revolution in the 1930s.

but YOU were there!

[Saras]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


You don't know how close we were to revolution in the 1930s.

Will I get closer by smoking two joints?

[chequita guevara]

I suggest you learn something of our Depression era politics before making glib statements like that.

[Patroklos]

I suggest you learn something of our Depression era politics before making glib statements like that.

I am sure your knoweldge of the period is just as cursory as the next guy. Being a communist does not give in instinctual knowledge of everything Pinko.

We were no more near a communist revolution than any other of the crackpot political viewpoints. Or in other words no serious or organized threat existed as all.

[Dr Strangelove]

By 1940 the threat of revolution was well past.

In fact the Japanese invasion of the Dutch East Indies made very little difference in the Japanese war effort. A few brilliant pieces of sabotage rendered the refineries inoperable, and the Japanese lacked the industrial facilities to fix them. Japan didn't even have sufficient tanker capacity to move the oil. In the long run Japan couldn't win. Their only real chance would have been to somehow force the US to lift the embargo.

Had the Germans forced the Soviets to capitulate the war still might not have been lost. The Germans were already facing growing rebellions in the conquered territories. Even if they managed to force the Russians to cede the Caucasus oil fields there is no guarantee that the resistance would have allowed them to profit from it. In fact the Nazis already had a track record of being extraordinarily inefficient at taping into the resources of their conquered lands. Eventually guerilla warfare would have taken as much toll on the Wehrmacht as the Red Army. That and eventually the US would have developed atomic weapons.

[Winston]

The invasion of the Dutch East Indies may not have made much difference to the Japanese war effort as such, but it did significantly worsen the worldwide shortage of rubber, complicating the Allied effort and advancement for a while, and eventually leading to the development of substitute synthetic rubber.

[Patroklos]

Even if they managed to force the Russians to cede the Caucasus oil fields there is no guarantee that the resistance would have allowed them to profit from it. In fact the Nazis already had a track record of being extraordinarily inefficient at taping into the resources of their conquered lands. Eventually guerilla warfare would have taken as much toll on the Wehrmacht as the Red Army. That and eventually the US would have developed atomic weapons.

Where do you guys get this stuff. There is no other power at that time that made use of captured armaments industries better than the Germanys. The Czech tank factores, Becker's assault guns at Normandy, etc. Really an unfounded and unsupportable comment.

As for the guerrilas the inteferance they caused the Germans seems large scaled to today, but compared to the total loses of Germany then at the hands of conventional forces their activity caused almost inconsequential damage. The best you can say is that they helped the conventionals do the work through intelligence, but the conventionals still did the work.

Resistance works better when you are simply complicating the enemies life untill the cavalry, conventional forces, arrive. This was the case in Russia, Poland, the Balkans, and France. If the power you are fighting for bows out, like say Russia, your continued resistance is meaningless. The Germans were not Americans, and would meet any inconvienance you put on them with brutality an order higher. Guerrilas are not very hard to beat if you have the will do do so. Most don't today, the Nazi's did.

[Patroklos]

Japan didn't even have sufficient tanker capacity to move the oil

Negative once again. They had plenty of tanker capacity when the mounted the invasion. They did, however, suffer horrific merchant marine loses to American and Commonwealth submarine forces starting the day hostilities started. It is doubtful that the Japanese or the Allies had any idea this would be the case.

[Dr Strangelove]

Actually the day that hostilities commenced the US was saddled with a defective torpedo design. It took nearly a year before a decent torpedo came into service.

The Germans may have been able to whip into production one or two items from the conquered lands, but agricultural and industrial production in the occupied territories never rose to even half of prewar levels.

Resistance activities in Yugoslavia were so pathetic that the Yugoslavs managed to drive the Axis out of their country before the Red Army reached their border?

The US already had a process for synthetic rubber before the war broke out. Synthetic rubber production began very quickly.

[Drake Tungsten]

Resistance activities in Yugoslavia were so pathetic that the Yugoslavs managed to drive the Axis out of their country before the Red Army reached their border?

Not to take anything away from the partisans, but I have a feeling that the Germans were pretty busy elsewhere at the time...

[Patroklos]

Actually the day that hostilities commenced the US was saddled with a defective torpedo design. It took nearly a year before a decent torpedo came into service.

It acually took longer than that. However, defective does not mean inoperable. The fact remains there was a holocaust of merchantmen/tankers at the hands of the allies in the first months of the war.

The Germans may have been able to whip into production one or two items from the conquered lands, but agricultural and industrial production in the occupied territories never rose to even half of prewar levels.

Wow, the entire arsenals of the Czech and Austrians, all mechanized equipment of Italy when the time came, All the lage guns of the Maginot Line, sever hundred captured French tanks, hundreds of artillery and anti-air guns left by the Brits at Dunkirk, quite a few T-34s with a new paint job. Surely that is but a pitance.

And am amazed you scoff at "half prewar levels." That is much more credit than I would give the Germans. That is AMAZING. This is inspite of those areas being recent war zones, hostile populations, sabotage, and allied bombing. What the hell is your criteria of success. And again is there a power you think did better?

Ever wonder why a blockade caused the capitulation of Germany in WWI but had no appreciable effect on her in WWII? Ever wonder why starvation was never a problem in Germany up to the very end?

Resistance activities in Yugoslavia were so pathetic that the Yugoslavs managed to drive the Axis out of their country before the Red Army reached their border?

Sp pathetic that the area was routinely held with less thn 50,000 troops throughout the war (compare that with the area and population of the Balkans). Very cute that you think it was the Yugoslaves that forced them out, rather than the Germans withdrawing them to deal with the ohhh, I don't know, eight million man strong Russian Juggernaught about to cut them off by taking Hungry a little north of there.

The US already had a process for synthetic rubber before the war broke out. Synthetic rubber production began very quickly.

And the Germans were very adept and sythetic oil production and other tricks to get more bang out of their fuel supply. Shortages, however, existed still.

[Zulu Elephant]

Coming a bit late to the party but...

Victory became impossible when Stalingrad turned in the Russians favour

Defeat became inevitable in the days following D-Day

[Patroklos]

D-Day was a sideshow, the war was won and lost on the Eastern Front.

Stalingrad was indeed a watershed event, but hardly a death blow. There were several instances where the Germans had oppurtunities to inflict a similar catastophies on the Russians in the next year. They simply failed at it.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Patroklos


It acually took longer than that. However, defective does not mean inoperable. The fact remains there was a holocaust of merchantmen/tankers at the hands of the allies in the first months of the war.

By 1943 allied interdiction of Japanese ocean freight began to take a toll, but the fact remains that the Japanese were not able to make use of their conquered oil fields even before the allies began to mount an effective blockade, and neveer managed to get the fields fully operable.

Wow, the entire arsenals of the Czech and Austrians, all mechanized equipment of Italy when the time came, All the lage guns of the Maginot Line, sever hundred captured French tanks, hundreds of artillery and anti-air guns left by the Brits at Dunkirk, quite a few T-34s with a new paint job. Surely that is but a pitance.

Were we talikng about captured armaments? I thought we were talking about production.

And am amazed you scoff at "half prewar levels." That is much more credit than I would give the Germans. That is AMAZING. This is inspite of those areas being recent war zones, hostile populations, sabotage, and allied bombing. What the hell is your criteria of success. And again is there a power you think did better?

German destruction of factories and rails in the areas of western Europe they overran was never anywhere as complete as ther destruction wrought by the allies. The mines, factories and transport facilities were largely intact, it's just that the Germans didn't know how to add them to their own production capacity, or were too paranoid to use what was available in the occupied zones. It's not possible to compare allied management of occupied former axis areas since the allies really did destroy virtually every useful facility.

Ever wonder why a blockade caused the capitulation of Germany in WWI but had no appreciable effect on her in WWII? Ever wonder why starvation was never a problem in Germany up to the very end?

This statement is not true. First, in 1942 and 1943 people were starving - in the occupied areas. Germans didn't starve because they were being fed by stolen produce. Had the Germans not mismanaged the agriculture in these areas there would have been plenty of food for both the occupied and the occupier. By late 1944 and 1945 Germans began to starve too. The journals of GIs marching east from Normandy and north form Scicily are repleat with descriptions of the state of malnutrition of the people of Europe

Sp pathetic that the area was routinely held with less thn 50,000 troops throughout the war (compare that with the area and population of the Balkans). Very cute that you think it was the Yugoslaves that forced them out, rather than the Germans withdrawing them to deal with the ohhh, I don't know, eight million man strong Russian Juggernaught about to cut them off by taking Hungry a little north of there.

You're way off in your estimates of the number of axis troops required to occupy Yugoslavia. I looked up the troop dispositions in Yugoslovia in 1943 and 1944. The Germans generally posted between 13 and 17 divisions in Yugoslovia during that time. This is not including non-German formations and it is not including security formations, Luftwaffe, and other support formations. I believe you're off by a factor of 10.

And the Germans were very adept and sythetic oil production and other tricks to get more bang out of their fuel supply. Shortages, however, existed still.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The one scenario where Germany doesn't lose is if Japan decides to risk America holding a knife to their throat, seize Indonesia and not attack Pearl, and attacks the USSR. Between Germany and Japan, the USSR goes down to defeat.

That appears to be impossible. The Japanese had to choose either a northern or a southern strategy, not both. Not concentrating on one front would be inviting disaster. They chose the southern expansion route because they were totally trounced early in a battle between the IJA and the Soviets, IIRC, in 1937.