A Tiger could take out nine Shermans in a row easily, but there were always ten Shermans on the field
Is that sarcasm? If not then that Sherman Tiger myth really needs to stop.
Churchill would never have agree'd to peace? That's also wrong tho. Churchill very much considered peace in 1940. So factually plausible. Given peace in the UK, a potential victory in the East and no Bases, or no war with the U.S. German victory in Europe is easy to see.
The M4 Sherman was the most produced tank of the war.
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/223296/1edd3a48-32e9-4f4c-acaa-9647421152d3/image.png
Let's see the most produced German Tank
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/223296/d6fb578b-69d5-4023-9a34-ddb5d239ffdc/image.png
Oof.
That's assuming the other nations would sit back and let it happen, remember, World War 2 started with them doing just that when they attacked Poland, that was the allies being fed up after Austria, Czechoslovakia and the Sudetenland. Once they had taken over Poland, they were already at war, and going further east/south would only divide their forces and give the allies their chance to build up fully and attack.
Pretty sure more T-34s were built than Shermans.
Pretty sure they made more T34's and variants than the total number of twinkies produced.
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/132551/f0fbb7c5-b157-4955-8bc9-95323f43b572/t34.png
Yup. Made with pure Stalinium as well
I take your point, but I would argue the fuel was more important to them than disrupting supply routes around Stalingrad.
WW2 started with the invasion of Poland, which was just an expansion to the east, they'd still get the ire of France and the UK. Even then, it's doubtful the Germans would ultimately be able to overcome the Soviets, there's just way too much land and too few Germans, not to mention all the other things they failed to do during the invasion.
Japan attacking America is because they had no oil to fight the war thanks to the American oil embargo, Japan is another situation of "fucked from the start"
thread music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fsql523bSj4
Yeah but if history were different the nazi state would have won that's all I'm saying
Sure if you radically change the Nazis and everything leading up to WW2 including things happening in other nations than yeah it could work.
Likewise if every American nuclear power plant and missile silo detonated at the same time during the Kuwait War then Saddam beats the US.
whoosh
this reminds of a funny post someone did in the Coolest Weapons Thread to sum up the differences in german and allied tank strategy, it went something like this
"Hans, hast du fixed the transmission yet? No? Two more hours? Ach, might as well, still waiting for die fuel supplies anyway!
We're refueled, are you one yet? Ja? Wunderbar, onwards!
Scheisse, das ist a lot of Shermans!"
In fairness this is the production from 1940-1958, not only the production during WWII. Though the number of T-34 and T-34-85s still beat the number of shermans produced by about 10k.
Even then they were bound to struggle from that. Which is why they attacked the Soviet Union to begin with, since they were already running out of resources.
Churchill did consider peace. Not sure how serious the consideration was, but yea, I've read something about that. But the thing is, he did consider it and decided against it, not sure what would it take for Churchill to make a different
decision. Nazis very much wanted British Africa.
It's not about disrupting supply routes, rather not letting the Red Army establish a strong foothold to attack the German flank. Wehrmacht didn't really leave Romanians to guard their flanks out of confidence, rather out of necessity. In
reality the German positions were stronger than if they just went past the Stalingrad and Red Army managed to successfully break the defenses anyway, so just leaving them undisturbed would've only made the crushing defeat more
severe, and with no getting out. Army group South would've collapsed, leaving a huge gaping hole in the front, with no one to fill it in.
I understand that some decisions made by OKW in 1942-43 seem stupid now, but it must be taken into consideration that they worked with what they had. If something was lacking on one direction, it's because no additional forces
could be spared. The frontier OKW had to deal with was just that fucking huge, and at that point they lost momentum so bad that most forces were mostly relegated to disrupting future Soviet counterattacks. Wehrmacht conquered a
lot of stuff, won a lot of battles, Nazi generals weren't stupid.
No he fucking didn't. Churchill from the moment he was sworn in as PM made it explicitly clear that he would go down fighting until every British man has spilled blood in order to surrender. He ruled out any deals until Nazi Germany became no more and there's a lot of evidence out there to back that up.
Churchill despised fascism and despised Hitler. To bring him to the same table as Hitler would of required a gun to his head but even then he'd tell you to pull the trigger.
If Hitler focused on England would he capture London and possibly the UK? Probably not. If anything, Churchill would of requested help from the Commonwealth (Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada, Newfoundland, South Africa, British Africa etc) and fucking gone, just like that. Hitler would step foot in London for an hour at most before he would of had to evacuate and fuck off.
So yeah, this imaginary fairytale that Churchill was prepared to get on his knees for Hitler is baseless as fuck. At worst he would of lost South Africa since most in SA were sympathetic to Hitler's cause but that wouldn't be for long.
I don't think it matters when you have that fucking many.
I don't think you know Churchill enough....
The Tiger isn't that advanced, it has an array of issues that generally plagued German tanking such as the transmission, especially the heavier war machines like Panther and Tiger series. The armour is often over exaggerated, for one the British 6pdr could defeat it from the front, and that was only a 57mm gun, while the 17pdr was just being phased in just in time for the Tiger, which itself in comparison is simply overkill.
"After Dunkirk, and before the Russians
and Americans entered the war, “a negotiated peace with an alternative
German government” seemed “the best possible outcome” to Churchill.
“Churchill was at pains
to say in his memoirs that he was never going to negotiate with
Germany, but it is clear that in 1940 he had not ruled out talking to a
non-Hitler German government,” said Professor Reynolds. “Here was a
man who was looking into the abyss.”
The
desperation felt by Churchill is starkly illustrated by one of the
quotes unearthed by Professor Reynolds. It records a conversation
between Churchill and General Hastings Ismay. The latter tells the PM
in the summer of 1940: “We will win the Battle of Britain”, to which
Churchill replies: “You and I will be dead in three months’ time.” "
I'm sure you can find where that comes from, book source is 'From World War to Cold War'
But no yeah the washed history of Churchill being a fearless leader who had no fears is completely legit.
nospoiler.com
From the one academic review I can find of that book on JSTOR
>Churchill did indeed discuss the possibility of a compromise peace, in private, but hoped that German bombing of London and other cities would bring an outraged US into the war, after the November 1940 election (an optimistic notion revealing Churchill's romantic vision of an America untarnished with Anglophobia). He felt that if Britain could 'Keep buggering on' through 1940 it could survive, for the German economy was 'taut' and 'vulnerable to British bombing'. Reynolds points out that it was Churchill who championed a bomber offensive early.
Review by Nicolas Bird, International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 83, No.1 (Jan., 2007), pp. 200-201
Yeah but that's the entire point, an alternate history where he did indeed decide to peace out on whatever terms with Germany, it was talked about, it was a vague possibility even if in the 1 in a million chance.
Even if that's correct, the source straight up says a non-Hitler government.
Which requires a coup.
Which will kill Germany.
There was a way for Germany to come out intact out of WW2. If Nazis capitulated, unconditionally, let go of everything they conquered and annexed, marched themselves to prison or all shot themselves. Then the Germany wouldn't
have had to be reduced to ruins and cease to exist completely for a decade. Because no matter what they did, the Allies would've never-ever just let them get away with the amount of shit they pulled. Just like when Japan was beaten
all the way to just their Islands by the might of US navy, their continental military crushed under the threads of Soviet tank armies, no peace could be possible - only complete unconditional capitulation.
Why are you insisting so much on the possibility of Nazi Germany getting away with waging a World War with it's ass intact? You yourself can't imagine a single scenario of this happening that doesn't depend on The Man in High Castletier fantasy. Since the end of WW2 generations of historians analyzed the documents and other data, careers have been made, and not a single person came up with definitive points in the 1930-40s where it all went wrong for the
Germany. The closest one can name is 30th of January, 1933.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.