WWIIOL or SW Galaxies

[Guest Fondas]

Milkshake, stay out of this...

 

 

[Guest Rogue 9]

I disagree with Hamblin on a count there, the Japanese believed there homeland was invunerable until operation dolittle proved otherwise. this had a devistating effect on Japanese Morale while it increased America's Morale. in this case Bombing was directley related to negative morale. I agree though that the opposite also occurs when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor it turned America into a united fighting front with one goal the complete defeat of her enemies. the Bombing of London gave the British Pride in the RAF which while much smaller than the German Air Force Drove them off time after time. and the Germans pointed to our bombing of them in their propaganda showing us as monster who didn't care for civilians.

 

------------------

Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

[Nute Gunray]

here's a tip: dont' put an encyclopedia down for a post. i can't remember half the stuff in it by the time i'm done reading.

 

anyhow, good job picking things that happened before the US was even IN the war. Yes, we should have used our time machines to send B-17s back in time to bomb the Italians in Ethopia in 1935!

All the evidence I've read suggests that British night bombing was ineffective at best, since they just couldn't see their targets.

I don't think morale was much of an issue for the Germans in WWII. They knew they were beaten the day the US broke out from Normandy. That's why they fell back to Belgium and didn't burn Paris to the ground like they were ordered. Furthermore, the Germans didn't ALL realize they'd lost until Aachen fell. Something you should know about the Germans: they don't give up. The Germans only can even begin to think about surrender once you push them back past the Rhien.

 

Also, we didn't do the same type of bombing as we did in German against Italy. That was more based on the ground (I had a relative killed at Anzio) and it was less of a war against Italy and more of a 'liberation.'

This post is getting long and i'm hungry.

 

[This message has been edited by Nute Gunray (edited May 29, 2001).]

[Guest Hamblin]

Originally posted by Nute Gunray:

here's a tip: dont' put an encyclopedia down for a post. i can't remember half the stuff in it by the time i'm done reading.

 

Again indicative of your poor debating skills, and use of UBB.

 

Ever heard of Copy and Paste?

 

anyhow, good job picking things that happened before the US was even IN the war. Yes, we should have used our time machines to send B-17s back in time to bomb the Italians in Ethopia in 1935!

 

Yes, I would really love to see you quote me mentioning the war in abyssinia at all.

 

All the evidence I've read suggests that British night bombing was ineffective at best, since they just couldn't see their targets.

 

Which is why 24 hour bombing was introduced. What's your point?

 

I don't think morale was much of an issue for the Germans in WWII. They knew they were beaten the day the US broke out from Normandy.

 

That's faulty reasoning. Just because they could see they were defeated after Normandy, just remember, that was in 1944. So, from 1939-1944, they also knew they were defeated, and therefore morale wasn't an issue for them?

 

You're assuming their attitude at one point in the war was the same as their attitude throughout the rest of the war.

 

Also, we didn't do the same type of bombing as we did in German against Italy. That was more based on the ground (I had a relative killed at Anzio) and it was less of a war against Italy and more of a 'liberation.'

This post is getting long and i'm hungry.

 

Precisely my point. You claimed, and I quote, that "It's a simple fact that US strategic bombing won that war". I therefore endeavoured to provide evidence of it playing no part in the war, and the invasion of Italy was one of them.

[Guest Rogue 9]

you still haven't mentioned why you believe Stratigec bombing didn't help in Japan, The Japanese Population hadn't felt the effects of the war as a whole until we bombed tokyo they began losing the war once that happened, it wasn't instant, our ground forces still fought to the utmost, but the Japanese Soldiers new that while they were fighting us their divinly protect homeland was getting bombed, their Morale was affected in a devistating way while they still fought a died for their country they were not nearly as effective as they once were.

 

------------------

Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

[Nute Gunray]

HA! No debate skills. There's a thing called 'laziness' combined with arrogance. I know I'm right and have no need argue. It's a simple fact that the Nazis could not produce the weaponry they needed to win the war because of all their factories getting hammered by US daylight raids (my mention of the British night bombing being ineffective was just something I was using to counter giving any recognition to another country accomplishing something during the war ).

Italy, North African, and several other locations simply could not be dealt with by strategic bombing. Using B-17s and B-24s against German armor in North Africa would have been only slightly more useful than Arc Light in Vietnam, since there was no jungle for the enemy to hide stuff in.

Also, I fail to see the point behind that "cut and paste" comment. Using a text editing function does not generate any interest in reading or caring about what you say.

 

I shall call you 'stupid' and a 'goat ****er' and say good day.

 

edited because i can't spell or something

 

[This message has been edited by Nute Gunray (edited May 29, 2001).]

[Guest Luke Skywalker]

Nute Gunray: imagine that you are at your home, you hear an alarm and then you out of your home and see the sky, you see a strange cloud that fly heading your city. You are the enemy now. You will be bombed, your home will destroyed and provably you will killed, if not, members of your family and friends will.

If you are the enemy, why you are not armed?

Targets in a war are: refineries, ammunition facilities, aircraft plants, airports not houses, childs, schools, churchs, women, old people or hospitals.

But you, a greedy and fearful death neimoidean, can´t understand that.

 

------------------

"We did it!!!"

>May the force be with you<

Luke Skywalker, 38th Kokou Sentai

 

 

[Guest Rogue 9]

So men are targets, Eh?

 

------------------

Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

[Poor Bastard]

Originally posted by Luke Skywalker:

But you, a greedy and fearful death neimoidean, can´t understand that.

 

I laughed when I read that

[Guest Hamblin]

Rogue 9, if you'll notice, I didn't say it didn't help in Japan, I said the war in the pacific. To be more precise, the pacific islands. Japanese troops were well entrenched in those islands, and the only way America got them off was the hard way - by sending US marines and ground troops to fight them on the ground.

 

HA! No debate skills. There's a thing called 'laziness' combined with arrogance. I know I'm right and have no need argue. It's a simple fact that the Nazis could not produce the weaponry they needed to win the war because of all their factories getting hammered by US daylight raids (my mention of the British night bombing being ineffective was just something I was using to counter giving any recognition to another country accomplishing something during the war ).

 

Ahhh, I see.

 

Italy, North African, and several other locations simply could not be dealt with by strategic bombing. Using B-17s and B-24s against German armor in North Africa would have been only slightly more useful than Arc Light in Vietnam, since there was no jungle for the enemy to hide stuff in.

 

Exactly my point.

 

Also, I fail to see the point behind that "cut and paste" comment. Using a text editing function does not generate any interest in reading or caring about what you say.

 

It's not up to me to generate interest in you. You said you couldn't remember my post because it was too big.

 

dont' put an encyclopedia down for a post. i can't remember half the stuff in it by the time i'm done reading.

 

Therefore, I said you should cut and paste it. Then you could just refer back to it whenever you wanted to.

[Nute Gunray]

Having a copy of the damn post still doesn't make me care.

REGARDLESS of how certain portions of the war were fought, the aerial campaign against Germany CLEARLY won the war. INDIRECTLY, it won even in North Africa. Those Panzers they used in NA certainly weren't built in Tunisia. They were built in factories in Germany.

 

In regards to Luke Skywalker's post, I would not see that at all. I would be off fighting since I would get drafted. AND I can see three nuclear targets from my house. I AM A TARGET RIGHT NOW. Do i care? no.

[Guest Rogue 9]

did I mention I am not in favor of Bombing Civilian Targets, but there are times when it is neccessary, Drug and Pesticide Factories can be easily converted into Chemical Warfare facilties. Nuclear Reactors can help Creat Nukes, a Center For Disease Control could be the Centerpeace for a Bio-Warfare research project. these are times when we must depend on our Intelligence services to ferret out the truth as we can't afford to ignore the possiblity. Also German Industry never had a shortage of Ball bearing at any point during the war, these were our main civilian Targets. while it is unfortunate that it happened this way the Germans were forced to reallocate resources to new factories constantly, resources that could have been used to great effect on the front.

 

------------------

Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

 

[This message has been edited by Rogue 9 (edited May 29, 2001).]

[ME_Jeldren]

Originally posted by Nute Gunray:

REGARDLESS of how certain portions of the war were fought, the aerial campaign against Germany CLEARLY won the war. .

 

The destruction of the german forces and their supply network has won the war. The effect

of the strategic bombing wasn't big. Simply read some reports about the Schweinfurt Raid

or simliar attacks.

 

[Guest Hamblin]

Having a copy of the damn post still doesn't make me care.

 

And I just told you, that's beside the point, as it's not my job to generate interest in you. You said you couldn't remember. I said you should copy and paste. If you still don't remember, it's not my problem.

 

REGARDLESS of how certain portions of the war were fought, the aerial campaign against Germany CLEARLY won the war.

 

When it didn't affect German industry at all?

[Nute Gunray]

Think of it this way: if the US and British hadn't bombed the German factories, how would the war have turn out? They would have been able to produce enough aircraft to destroy what was left of the RAF and maybe enough to hurt the bases the US was staging out of. Sealion II? They would have been able to build enough Panzers to counter the Russian tanks and possibly even force the Russians back to the point where the Russian factories were once again in range of German bombers.

A factory (hell, a CITY) gets destroyed and you have to rebuild that factory somewhere else. That takes men, machinery, and resources. A large building needs a lot of steel in. That steel could be used as armor plating or something on a Panzer. A crane is pretty much a tank with a lifting arm instead of a cannon and armor. Suppose you use slave labor to build the factory. You need guards.

So to replace a factory, just a single one not those huge complexes like the one in Stuttgart, you've tied up huge amounts of resources that could potentially be made into weapons.

Aerial bombing put such a strain on the somewhat limited German resources that they simply couldn't produce to the point they needed to in order to withstand the Allies. Putting troops on the ground was needed only for liberation of occupied nations (can't bomb france and say you've liberated it ) and for the 'end-game' move of occupying the enemy's capital.

Also notice that the victors (US and Russia) are two countries who's factories remained untouched for the majority of the war...how odd that two nations that DIDN'T face bombing are the ones that won (yes, I know the Russians DID get bombed, but they rebuild their factories out of range of German bombers five years before the war ended).

The US, Germany, and Japan won that war anyhow, so I don't care anymore.

[Guest Hamblin]

Originally posted by Nute Gunray:

Think of it this way: if the US and British hadn't bombed the German factories, how would the war have turn out?

 

Little or no difference, aside from public attitudes towards those doing the bombings.

 

They would have been able to produce enough aircraft to destroy what was left of the RAF and maybe enough to hurt the bases the US was staging out of. Sealion II?

 

They could've destroyed the entire Royal Air Force, and it wouldn't have meant squat. The Royal Navy would've stopped them. During the evacuation from Dunkirk, the Luftwaffe only sunk six Destroyers. That's pitiful. Furthermore, the Germans would've been invading in slow, unmanouverable barges designed for crossing the Rhein. They would've been easy targets.

 

And finally, once the German troops were ashore (Assuming they'd somehow, through some miracle, gotten through the Royal Navy), they would have no way of being resupplied, against an Army of almost 60 divisions, with limitless supplies.

 

They would have been able to build enough Panzers to counter the Russian tanks and possibly even force the Russians back to the point where the Russian factories were once again in range of German bombers.

 

They could've built all the Panzers they liked, they weren't getting past superior Russian strategy, the Russian winter, and the fact that they were suffering from a lack of fuel, bad supply lines, and Russian ferocity.

 

A factory (hell, a CITY) gets destroyed and you have to rebuild that factory somewhere else. That takes men, machinery, and resources. A large building needs a lot of steel in. That steel could be used as armor plating or something on a Panzer. A crane is pretty much a tank with a lifting arm instead of a cannon and armor. Suppose you use slave labor to build the factory. You need guards.

So to replace a factory, just a single one not those huge complexes like the one in Stuttgart, you've tied up huge amounts of resources that could potentially be made into weapons.

Aerial bombing put such a strain on the somewhat limited German resources that they simply couldn't produce to the point they needed to in order to withstand the Allies. Putting troops on the ground was needed only for liberation of occupied nations (can't bomb france and say you've liberated it ) and for the 'end-game' move of occupying the enemy's capital.

Also notice that the victors (US and Russia) are two countries who's factories remained untouched for the majority of the war...how odd that two nations that DIDN'T face bombing are the ones that won (yes, I know the Russians DID get bombed, but they rebuild their factories out of range of German bombers five years before the war ended).

 

Ohhhh, so that's why Germany won the war...oh, wait a minute, they didn't!

 

Strategically, they were complete morons. They weren't ready for Russian winter, and they suffered heavily because of that. Their equipment wasn't designed to handle the winter, their soldiers weren't trained to handle the winter, and that slowed down their progress immensely. Any second rate historian would tell you that (My mistake: almost any second rate historian, judging from you).

 

They weren't ready for the poor road conditions of Russia, which meant their supply trucks had immense difficulty getting to the front lines. So, their troops were poorly supplied. This meant their equipment couldn't be maintained, which meant their tanks eventually had to be abandoned because of poor maintenance. The more tanks they would've had there, the more the would've abandoned, because of having to spread their thin resources out even thinner.

 

And lastly, poor strategic planning. They should've made a straight, direct thrust towards Moscow. Cut off the head, and the body dies.

 

In short, these factors had nothing to do with the bombing of Germany. Simply having more tanks on the field wouldn't have done anything except give them some more tanks to throw away due to lack of maintenance.

 

It's Quality vs Quantity. You don't have an over-reliance on one, and then expect a military victory.

 

The US, Germany, and Japan won that war anyhow, so I don't care anymore.

 

So? If you don't care, then bugger off, I'm not your mother, don't come crying to me that you can't stand to be in an adult debate.

[Guest Rogue 9]

while the loss of moscow would have damaged Russia Greatly it probably would have motivated her troops in a way the soviets could not do themselves, the Capitol could have easily relocated to St. Petersburg or gone even farther east to avoid the German onslaught, the winter would have handled the poorly prepared German forces.

Strategic Bombing played a huge part in our winning the war, its largest effect was probably on our Morale by letting people know we could hit them. It also forced the German's to use Important Resources to defend its Factories and to rebuild them when they were destroyed. Were there factories allowed to remain unmolested through out the war their Air Force could have pounded the R.A.F. and the Army Air Corp into nothing, then U-Boats would have been much more effective as they would have been able to remain on the surface until they found a target. the German Fleet could have broken out of the fairly small British Blockade if the British fleet was forced to operate without air cover. then convoys would have had a much larger loss rate on the way to england, the build up for the invasion would at Normandy would not have been possible. the German grip upon Europe would have been solidified and they could have helped the Japanese Fleet in the Pacific.

 

------------------

Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

[Nute Gunray]

Originally posted by Hamblin:

So? If you don't care, then bugger off, I'm not your mother, don't come crying to me that you can't stand to be in an adult debate.

 

Okay ****head, now you've pissed me off. How about you ****ing get out of here? All you do is troll here and I certainly don't appreciate it.

PS ****head, half your debate was you calling me stupid. If anyone wasn't being an adult it was YOU.

look now you've gone and made me swear.

 

Someone close this one down.

[Guest Rogue 9]

double post

[Rebel Loyaltist]

Damn.....flame war 3rd degree.

 

------------------

My sigs never make sense and people never understand them. I really don't give a f*ck!

[Guest Rogue 9]

seems fine so far...

 

------------------

Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

[Rebel Loyaltist]

It'll probably get caotic(sp) if a mod doesn't show up.

 

------------------

My sigs never make sense and people never understand them. I really don't give a f*ck!

[Guest Rogue 9]

this would be really bad at Rs as its Rare for a MOD to show up.

[Guest Jabba The Hunt]

ummmm i wonder what would happen if I just suddenly mentioned...

 

 

HALF TIME!!!

 

------------------

Official Forum Newbian

 

For every wierdness there is an equal and opposite wierdness

 

For Chrisomatic web site handling email -

jabbathehunt@hotmail.com

[ME_Jeldren]

Originally posted by Rogue 9:

while the loss of moscow would have damaged Russia Greatly it probably would have motivated her troops in a way the soviets could not do themselves, the Capitol could have easily relocated to St. Petersburg or gone even farther east to avoid the German onslaught, the winter would have handled the poorly prepared German forces.

There is no St. Petersburg in WW2. Leningrad was besieged by german forces during WW2.

 

Were there factories allowed to remain unmolested through out the war their Air Force could have pounded the R.A.F. and the Army Air Corp into nothing, then U-Boats would have been much more effective as they would have been able to remain on the surface until they found a target.

 

Absolutly impossible. The U-Boats fought in the atlantic - outside the range of most

landbased fighters. Radar , the Convoysystem and Enigma doomed the U-Boats not

land based US or UK planes. Germany was never able to pound the UK or US Airforce

into nothing. Germany started to run out of good pilots in 43-44. An aircraft is worth

nothing if you don't have skilled pilots who know how to fly it effectly in combat.