Meanwhile across The Pond

[Britbillsfan]

True. They're not cheese-eating surrender monkeys, but without us, they would have lost to Hitler and the U-boats. Same thing in WWI. They live on an island and could NOT have fed their population.

 

Ever hear of lend-lease?

 

And by the way, chicot has no problem being coarse toward us, so all's fair.

In WWI it was the British blockade which ended Prussian resistance. Their last successful attacks had their troops stop as soon as they hit anywhere with food dumps to eat and get more food. It was seriously bad. Over a million Germans died of malnutrition as a result of the blockade and the anger this generated was one of the (multitude of) reasons that we had to go through even worse **** in WW2. The WWI subs were too few and had very short legs so were not all that effective overall.

 

As for WW2, well everyone did their part. The Soviets, US and UK all played vital roles. Without one of these Hitler would have most likely won in Europe.

[/dev/null]

As for WW2, well everyone did their part. The Soviets, US and UK all played vital roles. Without one of these Hitler would have most likely won in Europe.

 

Don't forget our friends the Italians. Instead of invading Russia earlier in the year, the Germans had to bail out the Italians and invade Russia later in the year. And we all know what the Russian winter did to the Germans

[Chef Jim]

Don't forget our friends the Italians. Instead of invading Russia earlier in the year, the Germans had to bail out the Italians and invade Russia later in the year. And we all know what the Russian winter did to the Germans

 

They keep the ball on the ground?

[DC Tom]

In WWI it was the British blockade which ended Prussian resistance. Their last successful attacks had their troops stop as soon as they hit anywhere with food dumps to eat and get more food. It was seriously bad. Over a million Germans died of malnutrition as a result of the blockade and the anger this generated was one of the (multitude of) reasons that we had to go through even worse **** in WW2. The WWI subs were too few and had very short legs so were not all that effective overall.

 

Actually, the WWI U-boats were not materially different from the Type VII U-boat of WWII. And were markedly more effective, as a matter of fact - the highest monthly shipping losses ever for the British merchant marine were in the spring of 1917 (about 900k tons for April or June - I forget which - of 1917, vs. about 750k tons in the worst month of WWII, November 1942). Britain was just more able to accept the losses in WWI, as she was more self-sufficient (at the very least, she could feed herself).

 

As for WW2, well everyone did their part. The Soviets, US and UK all played vital roles. Without one of these Hitler would have most likely won in Europe.

 

What's the old saying? WWII was won with British technology, American industry, and Russian blood. 80% of all German combat power deployed - and losses taken - was against the Soviets.

[erynthered]

Actually, the WWI U-boats were not materially different from the Type VII U-boat of WWII. And were markedly more effective, as a matter of fact - the highest monthly shipping losses ever for the British merchant marine were in the spring of 1917 (about 900k tons for April or June - I forget which - of 1917, vs. about 750k tons in the worst month of WWII, November 1942). Britain was just more able to accept the losses in WWI, as she was more self-sufficient (at the very least, she could feed herself).

 

 

 

What's the old saying? WWII was won with British technology, American industry, and Russian blood. 80% of all German combat power deployed - and losses taken - was against the Soviets.

 

 

To bad we dont have a true historian to refute what you say sometimes. Not that you're wrong, but just to give you some **** on all the **** you post. Which at times I would guess, is trully **** because no one refutes your ****. So in essence, I think you're full of **** at least half the time. And for you? Thats pretty good.

[LeviF]

To bad we dont have a true historian to refute what you say sometimes. Not that you're wrong, but just to give you some **** on all the **** you post. Which at times I would guess, is trully **** because no one refutes your ****. So in essence, I think you're full of **** at least half the time. And for you? Thats pretty good.

Only thing I can say about his post - the Soviets did absorb most of what the Germans could toss around. Without the USSR, the allies would have been in some trouble.

[erynthered]

Only thing I can say about his post - the Soviets did absorb most of what the Germans could toss around. Without the USSR, the allies would have been in some trouble.

 

 

You may be right, however, I hope you didnt miss my point.

[LeviF]

You may be right, however, I hope you didnt miss my point.

Of course not, I was only talking about the single post you replied to.

[Booster4324]

Of course not, I was only talking about the single post you replied to.

 

That still gives him 12k in reasonable posts, even before we add in his alts. That has most of the rest of us trumped...combined.