• right!!..caught you on the wrong foot…I apologize


  • I am still surprised that Japan attacking Russia got some votes.  You have to realize the Russians would not have to expend that much to repel a Japanese offenseive, the Chinese would recognize this and would be on a full out offensive to recapture lands lost and avenge Nanking.


  • Imo, the initial question is not precise enough, it’s not about Germany winning the air war against UK, it’s about “eliminating”, or at least removing UK as an enemy, it doesn’t matter if sealion are executed or if some German assassins kills Churchill and the other prime minister will make a deal with Germany to be allied with the Germans, or to stay neutral.

    But obviously, if there was any successful sealion operation, ……I would would probably be much better at typing in the German language then in English, even if you can see that English is not my first language…Norwegian or swede or any other nationalities, a German victory against UK would be devastating.

    If Germany wont teh WAR against UK before any war against Russia, the odds of Germany winning is much higher.

    Japan could not win anything from the US which is not giving away for free, but if Japan choose not to engage the US, but Russia instead, it could take 10-30 years to win a lot of square km2, but it could be (possibly) done.


  • Battle of Britain


  • If UK lost the air battle the US would have been forced to come into the war earlier, and we all know what happened when the US got rolling.  The battle of midway and DDay already means the US is in the war so the end is already decided.  Japanese attacking the USSR or any success by the Italians are the most important in my opinion.


  • We also know what happens when America enters wars without being attacked first…they wimp out and go home. Honestly losing the air war would have been devestating to the allies.


  • I still say that Japan attacking Russia would have been bad for the Allies beacause the forces that made up the bulk of the Russian counterattack outside of Moscow came from Siberia.  They came west once Stalin realized that Japan wasn’t going to attack.  The Germans might have been able to take Moscow and more if it weren’t for those troops from Siberia.  Plus Japan had been preparing for an invasion of Russia for years they would have know what they were doing.  They would have at least tied down Russian forces that were desperatly needed at the eastern front.  And even if the British lost the Battle of Britan, Germany didn’t have the resources to invade.

  • 2007 AAR League

    @idk_iam_swiss:

    We also know what happens when America enters wars without being attacked first…they wimp out and go home. Honestly losing the air war would have been devestating to the allies.

    evidence?  if you say vietnam i’m going to give you a long post for a history lesson.


  • This is the short version of the Vietnam war: US won the military victory, but the US did not win a political victory.
    The geo-strategical goals was not achieved.

    War is an expansion of politics, and so the US lost this one.


  • @Subotai:

    This is the short version of the Vietnam war: US won the military victory, but the US did not win a political victory.
    The geo-strategical goals was not achieved.

    War is an expansion of politics, and so the US lost this one.

    No no no. US did not win any military victory. They had to stick’em up with a white flag and run home. Butt US had the military capasity to win a military victory, if they were not backstabbed by their own politicians. It was poor play by JFK, who was on drugs, and later Nixon who was a criminal, that booged down the US military effort. Look, the poor pesants from North Vietnam would never in burning hell be able to kick out any western military power even if they tried. The Nam was kind of a suicide. Our muscles was ready to fight, butt our leaders used porridge as brain, and that basically got us down.


  • hmmm, there where only checkpoints no frontlines for the U.S.!
    I think somebody reported it but they must have overheard it?! :?…

  • '16 '15 '10

    @Historybuff:

    I still say that Japan attacking Russia would have been bad for the Allies beacause the forces that made up the bulk of the Russian counterattack outside of Moscow came from Siberia.  They came west once Stalin realized that Japan wasn’t going to attack.  The Germans might have been able to take Moscow and more if it weren’t for those troops from Siberia.  Plus Japan had been preparing for an invasion of Russia for years they would have know what they were doing.  They would have at least tied down Russian forces that were desperatly needed at the eastern front.  And even if the British lost the Battle of Britan, Germany didn’t have the resources to invade.

    Good points.  Another reason occurred to me recently why Japan didn’t attack Russia…I wonder if it’s valid in the light of scrutiny.  What if Japan was worried that the Russians would use their industrial capacity to supply weapons to the Chinese?  With China, Allies would have a limitless reserve of manpower…they would just need the guns and ammo to fight with.  There is no way the Japanese could blockade a Russian-Sino supply line, so they needed the peace treaty with Russia.  Not to mention the long term problem of China and the Soviets forming an anti-Japanese alliance, and the Soviets pressuring the Chinese Communists to resolve their differences and form a Popular Front with the Nationalists.


  • no I am not bashing americas military(it is one of if not the most advanced in the world today). I am however slighting there lack of commitment to actual conflicts that take more than a year. America just doesnt know how to control its own people!


  • @idk_iam_swiss:

    I am however slighting there lack of commitment to actual conflicts that take more than a year.

    Americans like instant solutions.


  • which is why mcdonalds, and plastic surgery are such a big deal in america


  • @Adlertag:

    @idk_iam_swiss:

    I am however slighting there lack of commitment to actual conflicts that take more than a year.

    Americans like instant solutions.

    You both have very good points. Can’t disagree.


  • @balungaloaf:

    @idk_iam_swiss:

    We also know what happens when America enters wars without being attacked first…they wimp out and go home. Honestly losing the air war would have been devestating to the allies.

    evidence?  if you say vietnam i’m going to give you a long post for a history lesson.

    I really want to see the long post of this, not that i have a strong opinion but i really want to see your logic and justification laid out. Vietnam certainly doesn’t look like a victory at first glance.


  • i would have to say if Germany wins the Battle of Britain…beucz if Britain falls…D-day doesnt take place…and the UK wouldnt be able to help the US in the Pacific against the Japanese


  • If Germany wins the air war over Britain, then there is no D Day invasion.


  • Maybe said before, but I am too lazy to read all posts.

    When D-Day happened the war was already over. As a Dutch man I still am very glad it happened, otherwise the Netherlands, Belgium and France would have the same fate as Hungary or Poland.

    I voted battle of Britain. No staging ground for US troops. No Atlantik Wall. Way less soldiers needed to protect the coast. But most importantly: MORALE! The boost to Germans, all resistance movements in France and other countries would have lowest morale possible, Russians fight alone, US not so eager to join the war, less British troops against Japan (or none at all, peace?) etc.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

35

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts