B29 or ME 410

[Yeager]

Yeager, the Russians were allowed to take credit for beating Germany.

The Soviet Union took one hell of a beating fighting the Germans.

65% of the allied military deaths were from the Soviet Union and they were fighting only one enemy.

China accounted for 23% and both the United States and the United Kingdom made up 2% of allied military deaths repectively.

Germany made up 65% of the axis military deaths and Japan 24%

These stats tell the story.  Russia, after having survived the winter of 1942, was going to destroy Germany with or without our help.  Had the Russians capitulated the US and the commonwealth would have been in a world of shet.   It was this fear that motivated Oppenheimer to develope the bomb.

[321BAR]

The Soviet Union took one hell of a beating fighting the Germans.

65% of the allied military deaths were from the Soviet Union and they were fighting only one enemy.

China accounted for 23% and both the United States and the United Kingdom made up 2% of allied military deaths repectively.

Germany made up 65% of the axis military deaths and Japan 24%

These stats tell the story.  Russia, after having survived the winter of 1942, was going to destroy Germany with or without our help.  Had the Russians capitulated the US and the commonwealth would have been in a world of shet.   It was this fear that motivated Oppenheimer to develope the bomb.

even without russia being in the war, Germany had overextended itself. it had already been turned back by Britain, supplies were being shipped to Britain and production was on the rise. Yes, Germany could have concentrated on assaulting britain and the lower countries and supporting italy in africa if not for barbarossa, but in the end, Germany had already started to push itself too far and would have lost. the problem is is that without russia in the war, Japan would not have had its turning point at Midway and would have held the pacific due to the concentration of war efforts in europe first

[Krusty]

The Soviet Union took one hell of a beating fighting the Germans.

65% of the allied military deaths were from the Soviet Union and they were fighting only one enemy.

That's entirely because of the Soviet policies. They sent unarmed people into the meat grinder and then shot them if they tried to fall back. Human life was a worthless thing in Soviet Russia and they exercised this on every front of the war, throwing thousands upon thousands of inferior tanks, planes, ships, into combat, throwing millions of ground forces away to literally buy a little time.

Their losses were entirely of their own doing and a symptom of the horrors that Stalin wrought upon his own people.


Really bad example to compare with other allied losses.

[Motherland]

the problem is is that without russia in the war, Japan would not have had its turning point at Midway and would have held the pacific due to the concentration of war efforts in europe first

What?

That's entirely because of the Soviet policies. They sent unarmed people into the meat grinder and then shot them if they tried to fall back. Human life was a worthless thing in Soviet Russia and they exercised this on every front of the war, throwing thousands upon thousands of inferior tanks, planes, ships, into combat, throwing millions of ground forces away to literally buy a little time.

Their losses were entirely of their own doing and a symptom of the horrors that Stalin wrought upon his own people.


Really bad example to compare with other allied losses.

It's one thing to say that the Soviets' losses were perhaps a bit disproportionate due to the Soviet (well, really goes through all of eastern Slavic history) war plan and general attitude toward the military, but to say that its completely irrelevant in gauging their contribution to the war effort is going a bit far.

[FLOTSOM]

even without russia being in the war, Germany had overextended itself. it had already been turned back by Britain, supplies were being shipped to Britain and production was on the rise. Yes, Germany could have concentrated on assaulting britain and the lower countries and supporting italy in africa if not for barbarossa, but in the end, Germany had already started to push itself too far and would have lost. the problem is is that without russia in the war, Japan would not have had its turning point at Midway and would have held the pacific due to the concentration of war efforts in europe first

i slightly disagree,

brits stood no chance against germany's full attention. the brits in no place turned back germany's assualt. if you are impling in africa, it was the american rienforcments and the fact that hitler dedicated so much to barbarosa that africa corps could not and were not properly supported. supplies to britain (and russia) were given on the lend lease program, so without american support britain (and russia) would have failed to turn the tide.

The Soviet Union took one hell of a beating fighting the Germans.

65% of the allied military deaths were from the Soviet Union and they were fighting only one enemy.

China accounted for 23% and both the United States and the United Kingdom made up 2% of allied military deaths repectively.

Germany made up 65% of the axis military deaths and Japan 24%

These stats tell the story.  Russia, after having survived the winter of 1942, was going to destroy Germany with or without our help.  Had the Russians capitulated the US and the commonwealth would have been in a world of shet.   It was this fear that motivated Oppenheimer to develope the bomb.

yes the recorded the most casualties, but 2 factors play into this number. 1 they could not fight germany without direct resupply and support from america and britain, and the payment for these supplies was the keeping of the bulk of the german war machine tied up in the west. 2 some (actually alot) of the russian dead were not by german hands. the russians were directly responsible for many of their own casualties. they put many of their own to death and they tended to count many civilian deaths in and amongst their military deaths.

i do not take away from the effort put in by the russians in the defeat of germany, but what i am saying is that it took the concerted efforts of all to accomplish it.

[warhed]

Don't forget Flotsom, it took the Russian war machine quite a bit of time to ramp up.  Once it got rolling, Germany lacked the ability to significantly affect it.  Once Germany attacked Russia, it was only a matter of time before the tides turned heavily in Russia's favor.

Without the United States in my opinion, Europe would of been speaking Russian, not German. 

[321BAR]

i slightly disagree,

brits stood no chance against germany's full attention. the brits in no place turned back germany's assualt. if you are impling in africa, it was the american rienforcments and the fact that hitler dedicated so much to barbarosa that africa corps could not and were not properly supported. supplies to britain (and russia) were given on the lend lease program, so without american support britain (and russia) would have failed to turn the tide.

I was talking about the luftwaffe and the BoB. without air superiority, britain would have fallen and britain turned back germany in 1939 there. El Alamein happened around the same time as torch yes but britain broke the axis line at el alamein 4 days before torch began. they are already being pushed back before america stepped in


edit: also, hitler didnt care for africa, he left it for italy. the only reason german forces were deployed there was due to the fact that italy needed the help. hitler didnt want to deploy there.

[Rino]

     The Battle of Britain started in 1940, so I doubt the UK turned back Germany in 1939.
Disregarding Lend-Lease, do you honestly believe that Operation Torch wasn't planned before
El Alamein?  Heck it took longer than that for the ships to get to North Africa.

[dirt911]

I have not figured this out yet, but when did all of this voting B-29/Me-410 come along?

[SD67]

I have not figured this out yet, but when did all of this voting B-29/Me-410 come along?

As soon as you log into the game

[Oldman731]

     I wonder what about the O club makes it ok for bad troll attempts 

Don't know, very rarely go to the O Club, but this is a clear winner as a troll.

- oldman (Australia...that's the land down under, isn't it...?)

[phatzo]

It just took a drunk Kiwi, I doubt he remembers posting.

[TOMCAT21]

A-26 would been nice but B-29 will suffice

[10thmd]

Do we know the results of the vote yet???   Come on 410

[flatiron1]

would the me-410 be in midwar?

"Deliveries began in January 1943" from Wikipedia.