LogFAQs > #955183559

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, Database 8 ( 02.18.2021-09-28-2021 ), DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	What if Hitler and Nazi Germany succeeded in WWII?
UnfairRepresent 06/18/21 8:07:05 PM #33:	Xavier_On_High posted... Britain was losing the war of attrition with regards to defending its allies and overseas territories, but mainland Britain was never in any serious danger This is just not true, all Britain needed to do was wait for the German economy to inevitably collapse. If the Battle of Britain had continued, the UK would have fallen years before Germany's economy collasped. As for the Battle of Britain, I don't see how it could be more of a curbstomp. Britain ended the battle with around 40% more aircraft than it started with, due to ramping up production. I know you're probably hearing all of this in Jeremy Clarkson's voice, but I say this as someone who generally has a pretty negative view of Britain. Your view of Britain is irrelevant, your view of history is wrong. It ramped up production because aircraft was needed to save the nation. Their plane reproduction was still slower than Germany's and their supplies to build planes was desperate, the planes were building were of lesser and lesser quality. They ONLY succeeded because of the combination of Germany's piss poor intelligence, terrible leadership and 2 front war. The UK was not only losing the battle of attrition, it was on the verge of losing completely That's not praise or condemation of the UK or Germany. It's just what happened. The idea that the "UK curbstomped Germany and would have been fine fighting for years until Germany collasped!" is just pure nonsense fiction Go to the RAF museum. Talk to historians and experts. Your view of history is utterly warped. The UK was desperate --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair! https://imgur.com/yPw05Ob <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:955183559] in What if Hi... [t:79521278]...</cite> <quote>Xavier_On_High posted... </cite> <quote>Britain was losing the war of attrition with regards to defending its allies and overseas territories, but mainland Britain was never in any serious danger </quote> This is just not true, <quote> all Britain needed to do was wait for the German economy to inevitably collapse.</quote> If the Battle of Britain had continued, the UK would have fallen years before Germany's economy collasped. <quote> As for the Battle of Britain, I don't see how it could be more of a curbstomp. Britain ended the battle with around 40% more aircraft than it started with, due to ramping up production. I know you're probably hearing all of this in Jeremy Clarkson's voice, but I say this as someone who generally has a pretty negative view of Britain.</quote> Your view of Britain is irrelevant, your view of history is wrong. It ramped up production because aircraft was needed to save the nation. Their plane reproduction was still slower than Germany's and their supplies to build planes was desperate, the planes were building were of lesser and lesser quality. They ONLY succeeded because of the combination of Germany's piss poor intelligence, terrible leadership and 2 front war. The UK was not only losing the battle of attrition, it was on the verge of losing completely That's not praise or condemation of the UK or Germany. It's just what happened. The idea that the "UK curbstomped Germany and would have been fine fighting for years until Germany collasped!" is just pure nonsense fiction Go to the RAF museum. Talk to historians and experts. Your view of history is utterly warped. The UK was desperate --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair! https://imgur.com/yPw05Ob</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1