What Country Was most importaint to winning WWII

[Zardnaar]

Adler I may be wrong and got the 2 figures mixed up. Grofaz was the allies best weapon of WW2. The Germans would have either won the war, called it quits after France was defeated or sued for peace alot earlier than they did.

 

[happy_Alex]

why dosent civ tot work on my crappy windows xp home editn??

 

[Adler17]

Best weapon? Okay, but since he was in a way biological the allies have to take the response for him and his deeds.
Happy Alex, I can´t help you because I have win 2k and didn´t try to install civ tot. But I think here it is a bad thread for your question. Go to the civ 2 forum.

Adler

 

[Prof. Garfield]

In a way, Poland. They bought the enigma code from the German defect, when France and England refused. They then gave the code to the British soon after, there by alowing the british to create computers and other devices to crakc the enigma. After that, they send a plane to spot the boat they already know is there (When the axis boats were crossing the Mediterainian in order to bring suplies) and then attack the boat after the plain returns (they were not alowed to use the enigma without first faking the "conventional" method of spotting) If the germans didn't think that the enigma couldn't be broken and had spent more security with it (their navy was an important exeption) it might have been more difficult to win. Then there was the the special bomb that was designed to destroy hydro dams, (it was much more dificult than just drop a bomb at the right place) therby significantly reducing the production capacity of germany and creating floods.

You could also say that Briton wasn't nessisary to victory by D-Day, the americans could have invaded through Italy or Spain, at least in theory. By the way, the Canadian force was the only one to achieve its objectives on D-Day, and only one troop of Americans had grater resistance. France and Great Briton were respnsible for WWII in a way, because they didn't do anything about the German violations of treaties when they jsut began. They should also have read Mein Kamph.

 

[ellie]

Russia no doubt about it imho. ALthough all the major allies where
vital

 

[Adler17]

Garfield, the bombing of the dams killed many civilians, but did´nt have a big influence on the German production. So these bombings were a failure. And if the US invaded Spain they would have to cross the Pyrenees and the Alps in Italy. Italy was much more a disaster for the US forces. Although numerically far superiror they were not able to conquer whole Italy. Not to mention they had then to cross the alps...
Mein Kampf was read by many people. Nearly all, except some idiots, didn´t believe someone could try to make this true. It was considered as election propaganda. They were wrong...

Adler

 

[Gagliaudo]

Ha Ha Ha! Italy.....

No seriously, Italy had 5 gears in its tanks. 3 Neutral and 2 Reverse. No way Italy. She was unprepared. Look at WWI. They tried to invade Austria-Hungary and were beat back. When they tried to invade France near Nice, they were pushed back in WWII. They had a hard time defeating the Ethiopians AND THEY HAD SPEARS!!!! They couldn't easily defeat the Albanians or the Greeks. The Italians were a crutch, not an ally.

I admit war between Italia and Ethiopia was quite a David/Golia struggle... but don't forget (as Silver2039 wrote) that 'David' was heavily helped and supported with modern guns by other countries (GB, France... anyone more???), without them, Abissinian army had been defeated quickly and more easily...
IIRC, even GB had problems and defeats in some of his colonial wars... and nobody was helping his enemies (quite never)...
About WWI... bah... Italia defeated the so-called "Strafexpedition" (punitive expedition) in 1916, a deep attempt to invade NE italian regions by Osterreicher army... Same story at Piave 1917/8.
However I agree that italian commands and preparation in both WW were really awful. Perhaps a poor ally, but without Italia, how could Rommel have arrived in North Africa? Certainly not from sky (as in Kreta 1941)...
Hitler sent DAK in Africa, cause it was HIS interest support Italians there.
However, Italia hadn't to join ww2. And perhaps it was better neither join ww1...

 

[Adler17]

Well, the Italians had to invade Ethipia twice before they were able to annex it. And the Italian victories of ww1 were more or less the defeating of small assaults. Only the last victory was a big victory- a few days before the end of the war. The Strafexpedition you mentioned was a sucessful Austrian offensive in South Tyrol (Südtirol/ Alto Adige). The Austrians were able to defeat the Italians and had to stop at the gate to the Po flat only because of the Russian Brussilov offensive. So it was not the Italians but the Russians who terminated this offensive.And what about the Isonzo battles? IIRC 13 offensives against weak Austrian untis. All failed. And the smashing of the Austrian offensive in 1918 was because of the dissolving Austrian troops.
If the Italians did their thing well, Rommel didn´t need to go to Africa. The Italians would have captured Egypt and the Sues, So Hitler HAD to send Rommel BECAUSE of the Italian defeats against smaller British forces.
So Italy was a poor ally in both wars. If the Italians stayed loyal to their origianl allies, Germany and Austria, they might got more.
With these facts you can´t say these jokes are too bad and hurting Italians.

Adler

 

[Gagliaudo]

I've already said that Italia had GREAT problems in his army commands and preparation (linked to politic problems too). With these startpoints, I think victories are welcome exceptions... Those problems influenced heavily NorthAfrican struggle with British in Egypt. That's why I said also that Italia hadn't join Hitler adventure (but in 1940 the situation seemed too good, and Mussolini made one of his biggest errors). Caudillo F.Franco keep Spain out of war (nothwithstanding Hitler's pressions) but Spain had already been vasted by Civil War.
About Ethopia, I already said that not only Italian problems, but GB-France helps gave important contributes to Ethiopian resistance.
I agree Italia was a poor ally (more in ww2 that in ww1, where it was ally with Entente, not more with Central Powers).
I think these things were mostly effects of some Italian persons who made awful errors. The only things that could hurt Italians -IMHO - is to speak respectless about tragic events that Italians had already paid with their own blood.
In some parts of your posts (mostly past) it seems you are bad-minded with Italians, and I can't explain these. I hope I'm wrong.
I don't contest your preparation, Adler, I think it's appreciable; but you know well that there are a lot of ways to speak about something (especially war that saw millions of casualties). I hope you understand, I dislike non-sense polemic, I like historical forums (people exchanging his knowledge and opinion, respecting each other).

 

[Adler17]

Well, I do not have any prejudices against Italians, I only critizize the Italian military in both wars. So we both agree they were a bad ally. I don´t know exactly, but there seemed to be mostly incompetent leaders in Italy in the last century (and today!). Where are the Prince Eugenes or the Garibaldis of the past? This is I critizise. Jokes are only one way. I know they might hurt and so I´m carefull to tell. But some of them are also part of history. I do not want to hurt anyone with any jokes. But again these jokes show the inability of the Italian military. The were great Italian deeds like the attack on Alexandria were two British battleships were sunk. They had to be repaired for months. Or the return of the Italian Ethiopia submarine squadron. But compared with the rest they are hidden in the shadow of incompetence.
But here is a joke about the German Luftwaffe of the last years:
Feldwebel to Flakgunner recruit: The US planes are silver, the Russians are dark green with a red star and if the plane is invisible then it is ours. (Boy, we had cloaking devices in ww2 )
This is also only a joke. There were aerial fightings until the very end of course. But the allied forces were too many.

Adler

 

[Gagliaudo]

Yes, we're both agree Italia was bad ally.
And, uber alle, nice to know you're okay with Italia.

I'll celebrate this 'happy end' with a "pantagruelic" lunch

 

[rilnator]

You could also say that Briton wasn't nessisary to victory by D-Day, the americans could have invaded through Italy or Spain, at least in theory.

My history books must be wrong coz I've always thought that Spain remained nuetral during WW2. And the Allies didn't exactly make speedy progress up the Italian boot either.
If Britain wasn't in the war then where would have the American air force been based when raiding western Europe? And would the landing craft sail from Washington in order to invade France?

 

[deo]

If Albert Einstein wasn't jewish,The germans would have won WWII

 

[Adler17]

Einstein wasn´t only a jew but also a pacifist and enemy of Hitler. He would have been in opposition anyway.

Adler

 

[rilnator]

Yeah, Einstein was too smart to be taken in by Hitler and his cronies.

 

[happy_Alex]

Yeah, Einstein was too smart to be taken in by Hitler and his cronies.

what about all the scientists who did worh for hitler e.g. werner von-braun?

 

[rilnator]

what about all the scientists who did worh for hitler e.g. werner von-braun?

May have been a patriot, or blind to what was really going on. A lot of German scientists worked for the Americans and Russians after the war so it may have been a money thing or they just loved doing their job.

 

[Ozz]

Where are the Prince Eugenes or the Garibaldis of the past?

Adler

But were'nt they fightin' Italians?

Italy was a new born in WW1 and fought better and in worse terrain (alps)
than in WW2. Their was nothing wrong with the Italian infantryman, it was
a hopelessly corrupt officer core (leadership) and regime (crap equipment)
that produced Italy's failures in WW2.

 

[Adler17]

The question was and is not the bravery of the soldiers but the effectivity of the Italian armed forces. And in three wars in Europe (German war 1866, WW1, WW2) and three in Africa (two attacks on Ethiopia and ww2) they looked very bad. In ww1 they were not able to crush the Austrian resistance in the alps although being much superior. 17 isonzo battles were not successful. The Austrian strike of 1916, in which the Austrian troops got to the gate to the Po flat, was only terminated because of the Russian Brussilov offensive. And the only big victory of the Italian forces was several days before the end of the war. No Italy was also in ww1 a bad ally.
Italy was unified finally like Germany in 1871. So it was Italy and no other state like the Kingdom of the two Sicilies fighting in ww1.

Adler

 

[Paasky]

If I was stupid, I'd say Finland... The only thing we did was that we killed a lot of Russians... Although they started the war already in 1939. More here

The Soviet's have a lot of real estate, so they either would've signed peace after the capturation of Leningrad, Moscow & Stalingrad. Or they would've continued to fight and eventually (if the Germans became too sure of themselves) invaded Germany.

... if D-Day had not hapened, the Germans could have thrown their full might upon the Soviets, and possibly delayed the end of the war until a potentially war-winning invention came along.

Germany's fate was sealed already in 1943, and it was only a question of time before the SU go into Berlin. And due to round-the-clock bombings by the US & Britain seriously reduced the oil refining & production of Germany.