Reflection on Pearl Harbor Day

[dre]

Uh....

We did round up Italians and Germans during WW1 and WW2...

True, but it was a lot more limited wasnt it? Anyhow, thats shameful and embarassing behavior too.

[Jack Weber]

How so? The Battle of Britain ended in 1940 and Barbarossa didn't start until 1941. Are you implying that's what saved the UK or what doomed the operation?

The delay in Barbarossa meant that the Battle for Moscow had to happen in Winter which gave the USSR the advantage. Stalin used seasoned Winter fighters from Siberia to fend of the Wehrmacht. This coincided with Pearl Harbour and Stalin knew that Japan had it's sights on the US and not on Russia. Otherwise the Siberian troops probably wouldn't have been re-deployed.

Another reason for the delay, I believe, was Hitlter telling Army Group Centre to assist Army Group South in taking Ukraine before taking Moscow. That was a tactical error.

But I'm confused as to what the end-game in defeating the USSR would have been even if they had taken Moscow. Stalin wisely moved his industrial strength to the east so they could built up their might, plus they were receiving tons of aid from the US.

I wonder if he thought he could link up with Japan in the east through Russia.

Had the NAZI's NOT bothered with meaningless Yugoslavia,and the NAZI's did basically because Adolph Hitler got in a snit because they would'nt capitulate,they would have overrun Moscow before Winter started...

This would have allowed the NAZI's to redeploy needed divisions to the French coast and recommenced a lenghty bombing campaign on the British Isles.The bombing of Britan's cities continued into 1944,even with a weakened Lufwaffe.Remember,Britain was on the brink during The Battle of Britain,and was in no shape a year later to fend off the full force of the NAZI army again...

But you mentioned the Japanese/Axis tactical error...IF the Japanese had attacked the Kamchatkan Peninsula,and the port of Vladivostok during Barbarossa,there's no doubt that it would have been the end of any hope Stalin had of winning anything in that war.It would also spelled the end of any hope for The Allies in Europe...

[backsavekkk]

yeah?

[Jack Weber]

Huh?

[Boges]

Had the NAZI's NOT bothered with meaningless Yugoslavia,and the NAZI's did basically because Adolph Hitler got in a snit because they would'nt capitulate,they would have overrun Moscow before Winter started...

This would have allowed the NAZI's to redeploy needed divisions to the French coast and recommenced a lenghty bombing campaign on the British Isles.The bombing of Britan's cities continued into 1944,even with a weakened Lufwaffe.Remember,Britain was on the brink during The Battle of Britain,and was in no shape a year later to fend off the full force of the NAZI army again...

But you mentioned the Japanese/Axis tactical error...IF the Japanese had attacked the Kamchatkan Peninsula,and the port of Vladivostok during Barbarossa,there's no doubt that it would have been the end of any hope Stalin had of winning anything in that war.It would also spelled the end of any hope for The Allies in Europe...

Of course I believe that the UK had no ability to repel a direct assault from Germany.

But I think that Hitler had two main goals in the early years of the War. First to get retribution for the Treaty of Versaille (taking France did this) and destroy the USSR. Invading the UK wasn't high on his list of priorities.

The Lufwaffe didn't really have the type of heavy bombers that could bring a country to its knees like the Allies did so the Blitz, I would argue, was not as severe as it could have been.

The bigger threat to the allies would have been if the North Africa campaign failed and Hitler had access to the Middle Eastern Oil Field. Because ultimately many the problems the Nazi's had for much of the war revolved around a lack of fuel.

As a total side note. I was watching a show about the campaign in Burma. Had Burma fell and Japan gone into India (which really was too hot on the UK) and Rommel ended up defeating Montgomery. It doesn't take much imagination to think that Japan and Germany could have also linked up through the middle east.

[Jack Weber]

Of course I believe that the UK had no ability to repel a direct assault from Germany.

But I think that Hitler had two main goals in the early years of the War. First to get retribution for the Treaty of Versaille (taking France did this) and destroy the USSR. Invading the UK wasn't high on his list of priorities.

The Lufwaffe didn't really have the type of heavy bombers that could bring a country to its knees like the Allies did so the Blitz, I would argue, was not as severe as it could have been.

The bigger threat to the allies would have been if the North Africa campaign failed and Hitler had access to the Middle Eastern Oil Field. Because ultimately many the problems the Nazi's had for much of the war revolved around a lack of fuel.

As a total side note. I was watching a show about the campaign in Burma. Had Burma fell and Japan gone into India (which really was too hot on the UK) and Rommel ended up defeating Montgomery. It doesn't take much imagination to think that Japan and Germany could have also linked up through the middle east.

Of course that belies the fact that he tried bomb the Brtish Isles out of existence...Or the infamous quote of "wringing the neck of the English chicken."...

And it would'nt have mattered of the Luftwaffe did'nt have the heavy bomber capability that the Allies had because by 1941,they would'nt have had enough time to deploy those planes.Had the USSR fell during a proper implementation of Operation Barbarossa,and most NAZI guns were aimed at Great Britain,there's no conceivable way to see how Great Britain would have survived...

Those 6 weeks in the summer of '41 are,in my estimation,the entire key to the Allied victory...

[Boges]

Those 6 weeks in the summer of '41 are,in my estimation,the entire key to the Allied victory...

Of course the overwhelming might of United States and Russian industry might have had something to do with it as well.

Oh and the fact that Hitler was a huge dumb ass.

[Jack Weber]

Of course the overwhelming might of United States and Russian industry might have had something to do with it as well.

Oh and the fact that Hitler was a huge dumb ass.

A megalomaniacal dumb ass...And the NAZI's got within 50 miles of Moscow as winter set in...6 weeks earlier they'd have made it....

Edited December 8, 2011 by Jack Weber

[Guest Derek L]

Well it would have made victory much more difficult. But history has proven that the Axis didn't have the resources to keep that war going.

Let's say they took Hawaii. Eventually the industrial strength that crushed the axis would have have turned the tide.

Japan was fighting a war on like 3 fronts, they had no shot at keeping that empire spreading at the pace they went in 1942.

The Japanese didn’t have the resources to take Hawaii (or a substantial foothold in North America)………Look at the Herculean effort it took the Allies to invade Normandy……….If the IJN had of sunk CINPAC's carriers in or around Pearl Harbour, the war would have been prolonged, at most, 6-8 months………The Americans only had three carriers (Enterprise/Yorktown/Lexington) in the western Pacific……What would have hurt more was the destruction of the bunker farms and the sub facilities.

Remember, within the first 12-18 months, the USN lost nearly all of it’s carriers during various battles/engagements……..USS Lexington, Hornet, Wasp and Yorktown were all sunk early, and the Saratoga and Enterprise both damaged……….It still wouldn’t have changed the delivery dates of the Essex and Independence classes in late 1942.….and the fact that all of the Battleships, except Arizona and Oklahoma returned.

[blueblood]

Of course that belies the fact that he tried bomb the Brtish Isles out of existence...Or the infamous quote of "wringing the neck of the English chicken."...

And it would'nt have mattered of the Luftwaffe did'nt have the heavy bomber capability that the Allies had because by 1941,they would'nt have had enough time to deploy those planes.Had the USSR fell during a proper implementation of Operation Barbarossa,and most NAZI guns were aimed at Great Britain,there's no conceivable way to see how Great Britain would have survived...

Those 6 weeks in the summer of '41 are,in my estimation,the entire key to the Allied victory...

Didn't the chasing of Stalingrad instead of securing the oilfields have a part to play as well?

[Boges]

Didn't the chasing of Stalingrad instead of securing the oilfields have a part to play as well?

Yes it did. Stalingrad was a symbol to Hitler. He thought taking that meant something more than it actually did. Paulus' army was one of Hitler's best and he expected them to starve to death.

He was a dumb ass.

[Jack Weber]

Didn't the chasing of Stalingrad instead of securing the oilfields have a part to play as well?

Yes it did....But as I said,the NAZI's were within 50 miles of Moscow,Stalingrad included,as winter set in...

6 weeks in Yugoslavia saved all of us!!!

[Boges]

Yes it did....But as I said,the NAZI's were within 50 miles of Moscow,Stalingrad included,as winter set in...

6 weeks in Yugoslavia saved all of us!!!

But even if he took Moscow, do you think the USSR would have surrendered? There was no way I can see the Germans taking that entire country.

[Guest Derek L]

The idea of Daytime Precision bombing without fighter escort was, for the most part, folly.

OK I won't call it limp-wristed but it was daft.

No, it was a perfect strategy………Bombing the German people, 24/7, did have effects on production……

[Boges]

No, it was a perfect strategy………Bombing the German people, 24/7, did have effects on production……

At such a high cost though.

They were considering sandbagging daytime bombing of Germany until the introduction of the the P-51.

[Guest Derek L]

Of course I believe that the UK had no ability to repel a direct assault from Germany.

The Royal Navy, with RAF “air superiority” (Subjective term) over the Channel, would have had something to say about that…..

[Jack Weber]

But even if he took Moscow, do you think the USSR would have surrendered? There was no way I can see the Germans taking that entire country.

I agree they could'nt control the entire country,but certainly most of the "European" portion (West of the Urals),and I don't think they would have surrendered.However,control that area of the USSR get's the NAZI's the petroleum they needed..It also allows them to deploy back West and aim alot of armour at Great Britain that they would not have held up against...

[Jack Weber]

The Royal Navy, with RAF “air superiority” (Subjective term) over the Channel, would have had something to say about that…..

Not in 1941 (Navy excluded) although the Deutsche Kriegsmarine was'nt chopped liver at that point either...

[Wilber]

The US faced the full might of the Luftwhata. The Brits and Canadians somewhat less so. There was nothing limp wristed about flying a B-24 or B-17 over Nazi Germany during the day.

Urban myth. It was much more dangerous to be in Bomber Command than the Eighth Airforce.

Out of 125,000 crew members in Bomber Command, 55,573 were killed (over 10,000 of them Canadians), 8403 wounded and 9838 made prisoner.

A 44.4% death rate.

In contrast. Out of 350,000 8th Airforce crew members, 26,000 were killed and 23,000 made prisoner.

The big difference being, Bomber Command crews flew a lot more missions per crew than the 8th Airforce.

In fact, next to U Boats, Bomber Command had the highest casualty rate of any service on either side in the European war.

[Boges]

The Royal Navy, with RAF “air superiority” (Subjective term) over the Channel, would have had something to say about that…..

Let's say Hitler had no plans to invade Russia and devoted 100% of his power towards taking down the UK. He could have done it.

Post Dunkirk their British Army was in horrible shape.

[Jack Weber]

Let's say Hitler had no plans to invade Russia and devoted 100% of his power towards taking down the UK. He could have done it.

Post Dunkirk their British Army was in horrible shape.

That would have been a cakewalk by that time...

No army could have stood up to the NAZI army between '39 to '42...

[Boges]

Urban myth. It was much more dangerous to be in Bomber Command than the Eighth Airforce.

Out of 125,000 crew members in Bomber Command, 55,573 were killed (over 10,000 of them Canadians), 8403 wounded and 9838 made prisoner.

A 44.4% death rate.

In contrast. Out of 350,000 8th Airforce crew members, 26,000 were killed and 23,000 made prisoner.

The big difference being, Bomber Command crews flew a lot more missions per crew than the 8th Airforce.

In fact, next to U Boats, Bomber Command had the highest casualty rate of any service on either side in the European war.

I didn't know this. Could this perhaps because Harris sent them to much more dangerous parts of Germany as well.

[Guest Derek L]

Of course that belies the fact that he tried bomb the Brtish Isles out of existence...Or the infamous quote of "wringing the neck of the English chicken."...

And it would'nt have mattered of the Luftwaffe did'nt have the heavy bomber capability that the Allies had because by 1941,they would'nt have had enough time to deploy those planes.Had the USSR fell during a proper implementation of Operation Barbarossa,and most NAZI guns were aimed at Great Britain,there's no conceivable way to see how Great Britain would have survived...

Those 6 weeks in the summer of '41 are,in my estimation,the entire key to the Allied victory...

By ‘41, RAF fighter command, had sufficient Spitfire & Hurricane squadrons to defend the British Isles from the Luftwaffe……by some opinions (Which I share), this significant amount of resources tied up in Britain, was at the expense of the more valid need for resources in other theatres (i.e. Malta, Greece, Cyprus, Singapore etc)

It’s doubtful the UK/Commonwealth would have won the war alone, but after holding off the Germans during the BoB, it’s also doubtful they would have lost/been invaded.

[Guest Derek L]

Not in 1941 (Navy excluded) although the Deutsche Kriegsmarine was'nt chopped liver at that point either...

The Home Fleet alone was larger than the entire German Navy…..by ‘41, the RAF had significant resources at home, at the determinant to other theatres.

[blueblood]

But even if he took Moscow, do you think the USSR would have surrendered? There was no way I can see the Germans taking that entire country.

Good point, I think Napoleon Torched Moscow when He narrowly beat the Russians there. I think the Russians would have followed he same recipe with the nazis.