Who started both World Wars?

Status
Not open for further replies.
9/11-investigator said:
- 1941 USA imposes oil embargo on Japan and the condition that Japan should abandon it's entire empire for the embargo to be lifted.
Click to expand...

Korea, Formosa, the Ryukyus, the Bonins, the Marianas (except Guam), the Palaus, the Carolines, and the Marshalls are not mentioned in the final US proposal, and whether "China" included Manchuria (Manchukuo) was not clear. Fail


9/11-investigator said:
Japan has no choice but to invade the oil-rich Dutch East-Indies and to attack Pearl Harbor to prevent America from intervening. Because Japan is part of the Axis, Roosevelt has his war with Germany, which he was aiming for ever since 1933.
Click to expand...


I have explained to you that the Tripartite PactWP was a defensive alliance, and therefore Germany was under no obligation to declare war on the United States after Japan attacked. Further, Hitler had broken every other agreement he'd ever made; why would anyone have expected him to honor this one, even had he been required to do so?
 
Gawdzilla said:
We have a positive result! I sent a link to this thread to a friend on was fence-sitting on the issue. After reading 9/11's material he's convinced that ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ started the war.

[qimg]http://rationalia.com/z/fireworks-074.gif[/qimg][qimg]http://rationalia.com/z/fireworks-074.gif[/qimg][qimg]http://rationalia.com/z/fireworks-074.gif[/qimg][qimg]http://rationalia.com/z/fireworks-074.gif[/qimg][qimg]http://rationalia.com/z/fireworks-074.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Then it has all been worth it.
 
I say we get back to making the top ten list of Germany's biggest military blunders of WWII. For good measure we can make a list of Japan's top ten blunders as well.
 
Corsair 115 said:
I say we get back to making the top ten list of Germany's biggest military blunders of WWII. For good measure we can make a list of Japan's top ten blunders as well.
Click to expand...

#1 would be putting ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ in charge, of course.

How about adding "not putting machine guns on their assault guns". A ten year old with a limpet mine could take one out.

Also, not developing a strategic air force. Bombing England into submission takes a delivery system for the bombs.
 
The Soviets had an agenda of their own and prepared for the attack in mid 1941.
Click to expand...
The Soviets wanted to delay any action for another two years, and wanted to help escalate the war in Western Europe to further weaken Germany's pool of manpower. This is one of the reasons that they signed the trade agreement with Germany IIRC in January.



This forced Hitler to attack the USSR first. Roosevelt engineered Pearl Harbor to obtain the main price: war in Europe.
So who wanted world war 2: American (Jews) and Soviets.
Click to expand...
Let's see; in 1925 Hitler expressed his desire to wipe out the Soviet Union (in Mein Kampf). In early 1941 the Germans started moving troops to the the border and flying over Soviet occupied land. Recent history showed that the Germans rarely stood by any agreements they signed. The Germans were in need of more resources if they were to continue their war with England. Stalin still had a large part of his military manpower on the other side of the world in case Japan decided to invade from Manchuko.

Stalin was repeatedly warned that an attack was coming, and was even told the date by multiple sources (including England with their decoding).

Your conclusion would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.
 
How about adding "not putting machine guns on their assault guns". A ten year old with a limpet mine could take one out.
Click to expand...

Doesn't follow. Assault Guns are not Tanks, they are Artillery. Those based on the Pz3 are cramped enough without finding space for an extra crew man to fire a machine gun.
In the Firefly version of the Sherman the hull machine gun was deleted to make extra space for the long ammunition.

Things like this happen all the time.

Matilda 2 (Queen of the Desert) was developed and deployed as an Infantry Tank but ut didn't have a hull machine gun and only had AP shot for it's gun, It was very good at tank on tank fighting but it couldn't destroy a machine gun position or anti tank gun.

Boulton Paul Defiant was a two seater fighter that had 4 guns in a rear turret but no fixed forward firing guns.
 
True but the Assault Gun as such was developed as a mobile artillery piece on the Pz3 chassis.
When you put the gun into the hull front of a Pz3 you don't have any space left for a hull machine gunner. The driver is on the left so the gun has to go to the right into the position that was occupied by the machine gunner. it's the same on the Pz4 which is more or less the same width.
Hetzer which was developed on the Czech Pz38 chassis as a mobile AT gun had the same problem no space in the hull front for a machine gunner.
When the Panther and Tiger hulls were used there was enough space to incorperate a hull machine gun as the main gun was mounted higher and the hull was wider.
Remember assault guns were built because they were cheaper and easier to build than tanks. they don't need the complex engineering plant and bearings required to build the turret Rings.
They also keep the overall silouhette and weight down as well making them easier to conceal (important for an AT gun) and allow more weight to be dedicated to armour.
Putting the gun into the hull also allows a bigger gun to be carried than could have been fitted into the original turret ring.
It allowed the Pz3 hull and drive train to continue in production after the tank itself was obsolete maximising production.
Hull ffont machine guns aren't any use as a defensive weapon anyway, they can't protect the sides and rear of the vehicle, you need a hull top weapon or supporting infantry for that.
 
They had a roof top Mg, just not fixed on the early models which were built with the short barrel 75mm howitzer as mobile artillery. Later versions had a folding armour plate shield for mounting and MG and Hetzers had a remote control mechanism for their hull top MG.
At the end of the day the lack of a machine gun on the Stug is hardly a great blunder by the Reich. I can think of dozens of similar design compramises and overlooked features on allied equipment as well.
 
Corsair 115 said:
I say we get back to making the top ten list of Germany's biggest military blunders of WWII. For good measure we can make a list of Japan's top ten blunders as well.
Click to expand...

"We're losing the Battle of Britain! Let's invade the largest country in the world, that'll show 'em!"

"We're losing to the Russians! Let's declare war on the US, that'll show 'em!"

In fairness to Hitler, I think a lot of his stupid decisions could be attributed to his personal physician and the fact that he experimented on Hitler with various amphetamine cocktails.
 
9/11-investigator said:
- 1915 Sinking of the Lusitania, together with Zimmermann telegram later used as pretext for American war entry.
Click to expand...

You already forgot that the USA didn't enter the war until 1917? Same for the Zimmerman telegram? That's sad. It was only a month ago in this thread you learned about the Zimmerman telegram.
 
Hey, detailed discussions of Military Hardware have become the equivilent of "Kittening" in a Nein 11 Investigator thread. I like it....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom