Things Hitler could have done to win WWII

World War II German Military
#441

Something that occurred to me since my last post on landing horses is that they wouldn’t have been landed before late September at the earliest. The problem for the Germans is that hay would have been cut in England in the June to August period, so there wouldn’t be much feed on the ground for their horses, which increases the burden on their lines of communication in bringing in their own feed and more so if they got bogged down by the defender soon after landing and were then fully dependent upon their own logistics to feed their horses. Or they could compensate by not landing the horses if they got bogged down, but that then reduces their logistical capacity even if their logistical demand is reduced by being contained in a smaller area than intended.

I wonder what restrictions the landing of horses would have placed on selection of landing places. Men can go up inclines that horses can’t, while if horses are being used to supply the men from beachheads they have to be landed very close to the men’s landing place.

I also wonder about the types of craft necessary to land horses. My very limited experience of horses is that they need ramps to get into and out of vehicles. Did Germany have the necessary vessels to cross the Channel or could they have adapted what they did have?

As far as I’m aware the Allies never had to contend with transporting, landing and supplying horses in their major landings in the Mediterranean, Pacific or on D-Day (I don’t know where the mules for Merrill’s Marauders came from, but they were a long way from the sea when they started anyway), but it seems to me that landing horses as a major transport component created a range of significant logistical and operational problems which limited tactical freedom of movement for Germany in attempting an invasion of Britain.

#442

airplanes can make drops though … :mrgreen:
which, again, needs air superiority

#443

Yes, but hay has an unexpected explosive capacity. :wink: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1laUlGAkolM

#444

Could kill some bugs I guess

#445

How could the Germans have ever successfully invaded Britain with men like these on guard?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL2TncW43os

#446

Big time!:slight_smile:

#447

Not quite sure how the American Indians got involved in this discussion, although there were Indian tribes that had the swastika among their glyphs. Maybe they were part of the Bund?

#448

ALLLLL the ladies say yeah!

#449

The swastika shape used by the American Indians has the legs pointing the opposite direction from the one perverted by the Reich. It represents the 4 winds(4 Principle compass directions.) Different versions of the swastika have been used by most of the World’s major civilizations. The swatika is a bindrune, the combination of two or more runes in order to combine their individual magical properties. The rune “Eihwaz” is doubled, magnifying its effects on the natural world. A partial definition of Eihwaz is," Strength, reliability, dependability, trustworthiness. Enlightenment, endurance. Defense, protection. The driving force to acquire, providing motivation and a sense of purpose. "
To answer your jest, Hitler and company stole something thousands of years old,which they thought would increase their power,and hold over the World, and perverted it, (woe working in the old magical religions) turning it into “Merkstave” the opposite number which has this going for it.“Eihwaz Reversed: Confusion, destruction, dissatisfaction, weakness.”

#450

I was joking but also expressing my annoyance at having the subject of American Indians injected into the discussion for what I interpret as rather suspicious and deflective purposes.

#451

Do you rmember what post the reference was in? I’d like to read it.

#452

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. In the end, Germany would have been beaten.

#453

you men “been” beaten ??? :slight_smile:

Perhaps, but only taken Hitlers specific views in account.
Germany could have beaten the UK, or at least forced a treaty.
Germany could have forced a treaty with the USSR as well, in a single front war.
Without the US involved, it would already have been different in a radical way.

#454

Actually, I meant have been beaten, as in smashed and trashed.

#455

The woulda, coulda discussion even goes further…
Germany and the German people were in fact smashed and trashed. Many books are written about the last war year in Germany, discussing the rule under Hitler, who carelessly forced his “germans” into doom.

#456

I don’t think this statement is true. In those days, only Congress could declare war. (It’s still true today, but US presidents have found ways to go to war without formal declarations). Even Roosevelt, who was no stranger to devious behavior to “end run” Congress, could not force Congress to declare war against its will absent a direct attack on American forces (as with the Japanese). The neutrality movement in the country was very strong. As for ‘The Japs were a scapegoat’, I take issue with that as well. It implies that the US declared war on Germany using Japan as the excuse. Please read history a little more thoroughly. The US declared war on Japan, not on Germany. When Hitler made the incredible mistake of declaring war on the United States, then, and only then, did the US declare war on Germany. With that, Hitler’s fate was sealed.

#457

Very True, I don’t think that way. :wink:
Unkess you really want to suggest Roosevelt didn’t know a thing about Pearl Harbour - as if the President of the US is the most uninformed man on earth - you cannot argue about his intentions. Not only it was about using war as an economic lever, it meant in fact already in advance grasping global power. I really need evidence about Roosevelts naivety to change my mind.
And Hitler had a pact with Japan. If he wouldn’t have declared war on the US, he would have needed to reject the pact.

#458

What exactly are you referring too? Are you saying he had foreknowledge of a Japanese attack specifically on Pearl Harbor?

Not only it was about using war as an economic lever, it meant in fact already in advance grasping global power. I really need evidence about Roosevelts naivety to change my mind.
And Hitler had a pact with Japan. If he wouldn’t have declared war on the US, he would have needed to reject the pact.

No one can change your mind if you decide to believe in the conspiratorial mainstay of the ‘omnipotent government.’ FDR and the U.S. DID believe the Japanese were going to strike at American facilities in the Pacific, but NEVER at Pearl! More like in the Philippines, which was the purpose of War Plan Orange…

Secondly, I assume you’re talking about the German-Japanese “pact?” The fact is that Hitler was under no obligation to declare war on the U.S. since the Imperial Japanese were the belligerents. The pact was defensive and only bound Hitler to war if the U.S. had attacked Japan…

#459

Nick is correct in this.

#460
  1. Build Fortifications on Poland/Russian border.
  2. DO NOT ATTACK RUSSIA!
  3. Continue with bombardment of UK airports, build up more Uboats and put pressure on UK and eventually occupy it.
  4. Destroy US fleet with produces Uboats after dealing with UK.