Discussion:
from Quora - How close was Germany and Japan to their own nuclear weapons?
Add Reply
a425couple
2021-02-14 19:09:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Some interesting reminders here:

from
https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons


James Welch, lives in Orange County, CA (2008-present)
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Not close at all.

Neither Japan nor Germany had the following:

A team of scientists—nuclear physicists, chemists, mathematicians,
explosive experts, and others—who, just from knowing about uranium
fission, could work out how to make a nuclear bomb. Hell, they didn’t
even get a working reactor!

The funds to make this possible. Remember, it took $2,000,000,000 1945
American dollars to build the first 4 nukes (Trinity, Little Boy, Fat
Man, and “the demon core”).

The resources to make this happen. The Manhattan project, for example,
used HUGE amounts of electricity to run the isotope separation plants.
In the 1950s these plants used **8%** of American electricity. Neither
the Japanese nor the Germans could build all the extra power plants;
they just did not have the manpower to build them, nor did they have the
copper to install the generators and then transmit the power to the
plants needed.

The Alsos Mission investigated this in 1945 and found the Germans had
not only not built nukes, they didn’t even have a blueprint of how to
get there! And Japan was worse off.

Finally, in both Germany and Japan the scientific resources were spread
amongst various ministries. No coordination nor cooperation.
------------------
a response

Emmett Smith
·
February 7
During the Korean War, U.S. troops who were pursuing the fleeing North
Korean army found a huge, artificial lake in a relatively remote part of
North Korea. Two hydroelectric dams impounded the lake, but they were
not connected to the North’s power grid! This complex remained a mystery
until long after the war ended. Finally, a Japanese scientist admitted
that the dams were built by his country in World War Two as power
sources for an atomic bomb project. The Japanese also created a four
engine bomber (based on a Kawanishi seaplane design!) to carry their
bomb and drop it on U.S. forces on Okinawa or Russian forces (if they
entered the war). The project was intended to make its first atomic bomb
some time in 1946.


James Welch
·
February 7
Emmett, please provide me a link or a reference.

I have read Boris Pash's book on the Alsos mission, which he commanded,
and I have also read The Making of the Atomic Bomb and Dark Sun, both by
Richard Rhodes. All three state the Germans and the Japanese were
nowhere NEAR making a nuke.

And by the way, the power supply would have to go somewhere. Separating
U235 is a tedious process that requires large amounts of power to run
the Calutrons. During the Manhattan Project, they went to the Treasury
Department to get 15,000 tons of SILVER to wind the magnets, as there
was not enough copper available. Did your source say what the Japanese
used to separate the isotopes?

Emmett SmithNo, they went no farther than to state that Japan was trying
to assemble a nuclear complex in Korea. The area was beyond the
knowledge -or the
No, they went no farther than to state that Japan was trying to assemble
a nuclear complex in Korea. The area was beyond the knowledge -or the
bombing range-of the allies. Information about their method for making a
bomb is sadly lacking. Maybe they were not entirely certain themselves!
Or maybe they were hoping for some assistance by German scientists. In
any case, the latter was not forthcoming and Japan ran out of time.

------------------------------


Frank Duncan, Radiation expert, Extensive study of the war against Japan.
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Germany had run all of the top scientists out because they were Jewish,
and “Jewish science” was bad science. They had very few top level
scientists left, Heisenberg being the best, and had made minimal
progress. By the end of the war, they had the beginnings of a nuclear
reactor, but the British sank the ferry carrying heavy water (D2O,
deuterium oxide) in a lake in Norway, so they were prevented from any
experimentation except with natural uranium which won’t work.

The Japanese had two programs going, one run by the Navy and one run by
the Army. They were both underfunded, under manned, and neither one made
any serious progress. Both were cancelled before the end of the war.

There were rumors that both Japan and Germany had set off atomic bombs
at the end of the war, but no scientific evidence has ever been found
for it. The early bombs were VERY inefficient and would have given off a
huge flash and left a big radioactive area, none of which has ever been
found. Not even a trace.

It might be added that the facilities to separate the U238/U235 isotopes
were HUGE and required enormous amounts of electricity. This was never
available in Germany and the Japanese had no extra power too spare,
either, and in either case there has never been a trace of a facility
capable of isotope separation been found.

Please note that although both had cyclotrons that could separate
isotopes, they made nanogram quantities, not tens of kilogram quantities.

--------------------------


Dan Gall, worked at Canadian Armed Forces (1972-1997)
Answered February 8
Germany had decided in 1939 that nuclear power was not suitable for
weapons, although they were working on developing nuclear power
reactors. The allies had developed a workable ‘pile’ (early reactor) in
1942 and with 500 scientists working on it developed a bomb in July
1945. The Germans were not working on a weapon, and only had 10
scientists on the project and still hadnt built a pile in 1945. The
earliest they could have had a weapon was 1950 but more likely 1955.

The Japanese didn’t have a dedicated project and were not working on a
weapon. They had 1 scientist working on nuclear studies.

98 views · Answer requested by Phil Swanson
Jim Wilkins
2021-02-14 22:38:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"a425couple" wrote in message news:***@news1.newsguy.com...

Some interesting reminders here:

from
https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons


James Welch, lives in Orange County, CA (2008-present)
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Not close at all.

---------------------------------

https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/german-atomic-bomb-project

I believe the only possible German atomic weapon would have been a reactor
built into a U-boot, and left to run away and melt down near the coast. This
is what they were likely to meet:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/hitler-tried-launch-cruise-missile-attack-submarines-us-71961

"Meanwhile, the Kriegsmarine continuously micromanaged the approach vectors
of its submarines via radio transmissions. These were intercepted by Allied
intelligence, giving the U.S. Navy a fairly good idea of where the U-Boats
were approaching from."
SolomonW
2021-02-15 22:43:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jim Wilkins
This
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/hitler-tried-launch-cruise-missile-attack-submarines-us-71961
"Meanwhile, the Kriegsmarine continuously micromanaged the approach vectors
of its submarines via radio transmissions. These were intercepted by Allied
intelligence, giving the U.S. Navy a fairly good idea of where the U-Boats
were approaching from."
thanks for this share, I found the use of torture interesting
Keith Willshaw
2021-02-16 09:12:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Jim Wilkins
This
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/hitler-tried-launch-cruise-missile-attack-submarines-us-71961
"Meanwhile, the Kriegsmarine continuously micromanaged the approach vectors
of its submarines via radio transmissions. These were intercepted by Allied
intelligence, giving the U.S. Navy a fairly good idea of where the U-Boats
were approaching from."
thanks for this share, I found the use of torture interesting
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.

By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.

In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
Jim Wilkins
2021-02-16 14:22:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:s0g297$fv4$***@dont-email.me...

On 15/02/2021 22:43, SolomonW wrote:
...

Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.

By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.

In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.

---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
SolomonW
2021-02-17 01:28:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
War is not just an accounting exercise.

The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.

You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Vincent
2021-02-17 08:16:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
War is not just an accounting exercise.
That is balderdash. All modern wars are based on logistics.

It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
starving to death when they surrendered.
Post by SolomonW
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
SolomonW
2021-02-17 10:10:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
War is not just an accounting exercise.
That is balderdash. All modern wars are based on logistics.
Mmmmmmmmm

So???

In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American in
ww2 then a German.





Post by Vincent
It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
starving to death when they surrendered.
And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Vincent
2021-02-18 06:16:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
War is not just an accounting exercise.
That is balderdash. All modern wars are based on logistics.
Mmmmmmmmm
So???
In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American in
ww2 then a German.
Logistics won that war for one side and lack of logistics lost it for
the other.
Post by SolomonW
http://youtu.be/3n0BpQj9jqc
Post by Vincent
It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
starving to death when they surrendered.
And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
Nations Wilson.

As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
SolomonW
2021-02-18 08:44:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
War is not just an accounting exercise.
That is balderdash. All modern wars are based on logistics.
Mmmmmmmmm
So???
In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American in
ww2 then a German.
Logistics won that war for one side and lack of logistics lost it for
the other.
Post by SolomonW
http://youtu.be/3n0BpQj9jqc
Post by Vincent
It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
starving to death when they surrendered.
And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
Nations Wilson.
The word was an Armistice, but it was a surrender. In the agreement the
Germans agreed to pull their troops out of France, Belgium and Luxembourg
within 15 days, or risk becoming prisoners of the Allies. They had to turn
over their arsenal, including 5,000 artillery pieces, 25,000 machine guns
and 1,700 airplanes, along with 5,000 railroad locomotives, 5,000 trucks
and 150,000 wagons. Germany also had to give up the contested territory of
Alsace-Lorraine. And they agreed to the indignity of Allied forces
occupying German territory along the Rhine, where they would stay until
1930.
Post by Vincent
As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
and our as wipe President Wilson.
They had good reasosn to stop fighting in ww1.
Post by Vincent
A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
I like to know who this Honorable German leader was?
Post by Vincent
Instead it led us
into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going!
Oh it went wrong alright.
Post by Vincent
They also expected harsh
penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
Not sorry for them about the hatsh penalties from the Russians.
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Vincent
2021-02-19 06:55:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
War is not just an accounting exercise.
That is balderdash. All modern wars are based on logistics.
Mmmmmmmmm
So???
In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American in
ww2 then a German.
Logistics won that war for one side and lack of logistics lost it for
the other.
Post by SolomonW
http://youtu.be/3n0BpQj9jqc
Post by Vincent
It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
starving to death when they surrendered.
And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
Nations Wilson.
The word was an Armistice, but it was a surrender. In the agreement the
Germans agreed to pull their troops out of France, Belgium and Luxembourg
within 15 days, or risk becoming prisoners of the Allies. They had to turn
over their arsenal, including 5,000 artillery pieces, 25,000 machine guns
and 1,700 airplanes, along with 5,000 railroad locomotives, 5,000 trucks
and 150,000 wagons. Germany also had to give up the contested territory of
Alsace-Lorraine. And they agreed to the indignity of Allied forces
occupying German territory along the Rhine, where they would stay until
1930.
You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back
and the Armistice. We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The
English more so then us. You can rewrite history all you want, but the
facts still remain. England was the perpetrator of continuing that war
when Germany tried to negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody.
Shithead Wilson got America into a war actually perpetrated by the
English! Some of the American states refused to allow the Federal
Government to send their citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was
NOT totally a coalition. The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within
Germany at the Behest of the English. German Troops had to return to
Germany in order to put down this revolution. To this day there are
Bolsheviks within the English Government. The Russians were kind enough
to publish papers highlighting this connection back then. Also the
Russians removed themselves from that war. Germany could well have
overrun France at that time but instead chose to negotiate an end.
People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
and our as wipe President Wilson.
They had good reasosn to stop fighting in ww1.
Post by Vincent
A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
I like to know who this Honorable German leader was?
If you are too fucking stupid to know that! I am wasting my time with a
fool.
AR!
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Instead it led us
into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going!
Oh it went wrong alright.
Post by Vincent
They also expected harsh
penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
Not sorry for them about the hatsh penalties from the Russians.
More stupidity on your part.

Change your net NYM as Solomon was a man of Wisdom and obviously you
are not.
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Keith Willshaw
2021-02-19 09:46:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back
and the Armistice. We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The
English more so then us. You can rewrite history all you want, but the
facts still remain. England was the perpetrator of continuing that war
when Germany tried to negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody.
Shithead Wilson got America into a war actually perpetrated by the
English! Some of the American states refused to allow the Federal
Government to send their citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was
NOT totally a coalition. The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within
Germany at the Behest of the English. German Troops had to return to
Germany in order to put down this revolution. To this day there are
Bolsheviks within the English Government. The Russians were kind enough
to publish papers highlighting this connection back then. Also the
Russians removed themselves from that war. Germany could well have
overrun France at that time but instead chose to negotiate an end.
People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
Enough of fantasy land.

England declared war because Germany invaded neutral Belgium and had
treaties that required it to come to its defence. The USA entered the
war because German U-Boats were sinking its ships on the high seas.

The reality is that in 1918 Germany was in terminal collapse, their last
defences had beem been breached.In nine days the British, French and US
forces crossed the Canal du Nord, broke through the Hindenburg Line and
took tens of thousands of prisoners and guns. This left what by now were
mobile motorised and armoured forces a clear run into Germany. On the
home front a full scale revolution was in progress in Germany and the
army was needed to restore order. By this point their allies, the Austro
Hungarian and Ottoman empires had collapsed, the armaments factories
were on strike. The German military had competent commanders in the
field but terribly mismanaged the war economy.Starving people do not
fight well.

The allies on the other hand were now well equipped, had an integrated
command structure and were using all arms strategy coordinating attacks
by air land and sea. The Armistice arrived just in time to prevent a
major attack from RN aircraft carriers on German naval bases.

The second battle of Cambrai ended up in a panicked German withdrawal,
second Candian division marched into the town with bands playing on 10th
October taking less than 20 casualties in the process as the German Army
fled east. The destruction they did in the process was a large part of
the reason the French and Belgians were adamant that the terms of an
armistice must be harsh.

The negotiator from the German Government was told to get an armistice
under ANY conditions.

As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation. It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia ! At least try and be accurate, the revolutionaries
in Germany were known as the Spartacist League who based their movement
on the Bolsheviks.
Jim Wilkins
2021-02-19 11:53:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back and
the Armistice. We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The English more
so then us. You can rewrite history all you want, but the facts still
remain. England was the perpetrator of continuing that war when Germany
tried to negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody. Shithead Wilson
got America into a war actually perpetrated by the English! Some of the
American states refused to allow the Federal Government to send their
citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was NOT totally a coalition.
The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within Germany at the Behest of the
English. German Troops had to return to Germany in order to put down this
revolution. To this day there are Bolsheviks within the English
Government. The Russians were kind enough to publish papers highlighting
this connection back then. Also the Russians removed themselves from that
war. Germany could well have overrun France at that time but instead chose
to negotiate an end.
People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
Enough of fantasy land.

England declared war because Germany invaded neutral Belgium and had
treaties that required it to come to its defence. The USA entered the
war because German U-Boats were sinking its ships on the high seas.

----------------------------
That, plus the Zimmermann telegram.
https://www.theworldwar.org/learn/wwi/zimmermann-telegram

Britain risked alienating the US by bugging our communications channels.
https://history.blog.gov.uk/2017/01/16/the-zimmermann-telegram-and-room-40/

"Whilst the British authorities wanted to pass this information to the
Americans, to do so would reveal that communications were being intercepted.
The Americans would not appreciate the thought that their signals might also
be collected. If the Germans then became aware of this and changed their
codes, the intelligence advantage would be lost. ... The answer was that
there were several copies of the telegram, with slightly different language.
By handing over the decoded version sent via the German Embassy in
Washington to Mexico, the British Government hoped to hide the fact that the
message had been intercepted, so that it would appear that the document had
been leaked in Mexico instead."
Jim Wilkins
2021-02-20 00:28:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:s0o1di$iul$***@dont-email.me...

...In nine days the British, French and US
forces crossed the Canal du Nord, broke through the Hindenburg Line and
took tens of thousands of prisoners and guns. This left what by now were
mobile motorised and armoured forces a clear run into Germany. ...

The allies on the other hand were now well equipped, had an integrated
command structure and were using all arms strategy coordinating attacks
by air land and sea. The Armistice arrived just in time to prevent a
major attack from RN aircraft carriers on German naval bases.
-----------------------------------------------------

By 1918 improving technology and experience in how to best use it permitted
effective combined-arms attacks over terrain less torn up than No Mans Land,
where only feet and tank treads could move. The leading innovator in this
was General Edmund Allenby, who had been sidelined to the Middle East after
the disastrous Somme assault, and had learned the lessons of that dismal
failure in which horse cavalry was supposed to break through cracks infantry
and artillery made in the German lines. Cavalry did get past the German
trenches but was ineffective against machine guns, however Lawrence of
Arabia had shown that armored cars with machine gun turrets could make such
a plan work, at least on ground not shattered by years of artillery.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Armoured_Car
"The armoured cars were poorly suited to the muddy trench filled
battlefields of the Western Front, but were able to operate in the Near
East, so the squadron from France went to Egypt."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Megiddo_(1918)
"concentration, surprise, and speed were key elements in the blitzkrieg
warfare planned by Allenby."

WW2 picked up almost where WW1 had left off, with bolt action rifles, horse
transportation and biplanes for ground support. Rommel and Guderian were
ignoring orders when they used their motorized armored elements to dash
ahead of the plodding infantry and horse-drawn artillery and defeat the
British and French more by surprise and confusion than military might.
Guderian didn't have the artillery or infantry for a house-to-house fight in
Dunkirk.
Jim Wilkins
2021-02-20 11:41:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message news:s0pl49$n41$***@dont-email.me...

... Guderian didn't have the artillery or infantry for a house-to-house
fight in
Dunkirk.
-----------------------
An example of the Dunkirk ground defense:
http://www.mgb-stuff.org.uk/harry/cassel.htm
"The general idea of holding Cassel was to make the place into a tank-proof
fortress."

"For the last, most critical days of the retreat, the five important roads
of which Cassel was the centre, had been denied to the enemy and secured to
its comrades by the courage of this doomed detachment."
SolomonW
2021-02-20 10:22:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
A bit strong, they were allies.
Post by Keith Willshaw
It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia !
They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
Vincent
2021-02-21 02:20:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
Post by SolomonW
A bit strong, they were allies.
Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia !
No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia. This
occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to contaminate
the Russian leadership.
Post by SolomonW
They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing
in Germany?

Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest you
wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring pictures
instead of wasting our time?
Geoffrey Sinclair
2021-02-21 10:18:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
A bit strong, they were allies.
Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
Post by Vincent
Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
war mode.

The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.

The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
a Bolshevik one.

The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
allow the invasion of southern Germany.

So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia !
No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
are not sending him service.
Post by Vincent
This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
contaminate the Russian leadership.
Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
up in power.
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing in
Germany?
Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
Post by Vincent
Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest you
wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring pictures
instead of wasting our time?
The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Vincent
2021-02-22 00:37:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
to who created them.  And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it
happen. I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front
yard?
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
A bit strong, they were allies.
Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
Post by Vincent
Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
leave the war.  So the German leadership moved to get out of the
war mode.
I am glad you are convinced that that was a one year war. Now if we can
only make the mess in the ME and elsewhere into just one year conflicts.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
Your point?
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
a Bolshevik one.
Wow. We have another fact shoved down the 1984 memory hole.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
allow the invasion of southern Germany.
So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
Are you kidding? Look it up. Like I said, Your education is lacking and
I recommend helping yourself.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
  It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia !
No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
are not sending him service.
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
contaminate the Russian leadership.
Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
up in power.
Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's. Some of our
greatest loses of secrets was through your establishments. Even the Jews
are touchy about what you are told.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
I see. It was only a way way thing. Damn good thing the USA didn't allow
Germany to set up German language schools for you.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing
in Germany?
Nope.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
Perhaps you can show either or neither.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest
you wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring
pictures instead of wasting our time?
The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
Is such were the case ...I am sure you would be incapable of any quality.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Geoffrey Sinclair
2021-02-22 09:09:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it happen.
Actually no. Feel free to provide the examples of the British selling
weapons to the Bolsheviks.

Feel free to provide examples of British money to the Bolsheviks.

The Russian government owed Britain about as much as Britain
owed the USA, the Bolsheviks repudiated the debts of the Russian
government which made it harder for the British to handle the
problems of the next 30 years.
I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front yard?
Still trying to get rid of yours?

Think of Vincent as someone who needs to keep changing the
subject when asked for proof.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
A bit strong, they were allies.
Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
Post by Vincent
Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
war mode.
I am glad you are convinced that that was a one year war.
Change of subject. August to November 1918 is one year?
Now if we can only make the mess in the ME and elsewhere into just one
year conflicts.
Change of subject. Difficult given the definition of one year being used.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
Your point?
No troop movements home to counter Bolsheviks.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
a Bolshevik one.
Wow. We have another fact shoved down the 1984 memory hole.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
allow the invasion of southern Germany.
So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
Are you kidding?
No.
Look it up.
I did.
Like I said, Your education is lacking and I recommend helping yourself.
Change of subject,. Vincent never said it to me, sounds like someone
losing track of things, explains much.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia !
No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
are not sending him service.
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Change of subject. But amusing this time, the admission Lenin, the
Bolsheviks, were serving a purpose to the Germans, which of course
explains the money and weapons the Germans gave his movement.

Then add legitimacy by negotiating with them for the end of the war,
then popularity for ending the war and by reducing the size of Russia
made it easier for the Bolsheviks to consolidate power.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
contaminate the Russian leadership.
Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
up in power.
Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's.
Change of subject. As for pink, sunburn does that to many people.
Some of our greatest loses of secrets was through your establishments.
Change of subject. Anyway when did I take ownership of the establishments?
Even the Jews are touchy about what you are told.
Change of subject but an interesting revelation of Vincent's prejudices.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
Solomon wrote the above.
I see. It was only a way way thing.
Change to incoherent subject. The Germans gave the Bolsheviks money,
weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
Damn good thing the USA didn't allow Germany to set up German language
schools for you.
Change of subject, anyway it would be more useful these days to learn
Chinese.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing
in Germany?
Solomon wrote the above.
Nope.
Still trying to reply to stuff I never wrote, I see. The Germans gave the
Bolsheviks
money, weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
Perhaps you can show either or neither.
Vincent makes the claim, Vincent cannot back it up.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest you
wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring pictures
instead of wasting our time?
The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
Is such were the case ...
Is such were the case? It is being proved.
I am sure you would be incapable of any quality.
Good to know Vincent is disapproving, that shows people are on the
right (left?) track.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Vincent
2021-02-23 02:13:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection
and civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it happen.
Actually no.  Feel free to provide the examples of the British selling
weapons to the Bolsheviks.
Feel free to prove otherwise. The Brits sold weapons to anyone that
wanted them, as does USA, Russia et al.
Feel free to provide examples of British money to the Bolsheviks.
There is an open book on that..Read it amnd stop the idiot responses.
The Russian government owed Britain about as much as Britain
owed the USA, the Bolsheviks repudiated the debts of the Russian
government which made it harder for the British to handle the
problems of the next 30 years.
Make up your fucking mind...
The Bolsheviks were Russians!
I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front yard?
Still trying to get rid of yours?
If I had one, I definitely would give it to you. It would give you and
your kind something to masturbate to.
Think of Vincent as someone who needs to keep changing the
subject when asked for proof.
Think of GS as too damned lazy to do his own homework. The Archives of
any good News media has published it all a number of times.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
A bit strong, they were allies.
Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
Post by Vincent
Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
war mode.
I am glad you are convinced that that was a one year war.
Change of subject.  August to November 1918 is one year?
So you are claiming a several month war. If that is true, why not show
us how to do that in the ME and elsewhere. Popcorn and coke timing for
wars could become quite popular.
Now if we can only make the mess in the ME and elsewhere into just one
year conflicts.
Change of subject. Difficult given the definition of one year being used.
Do try to keep up. I bet your folks were beside themselves trying to
educate you.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
Your point?
No troop movements home to counter Bolsheviks.
Could it be that you changed timelines to fit whatever tall story you
are selling?
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
a Bolshevik one.
Wow. We have another fact shoved down the 1984 memory hole.
Change of subject.  Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
allow the invasion of southern Germany.
So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
Are you kidding?
No.
Then you are prevaricating!
Look it up.
I did.
You are supposed to keep you mind and eyes open when researching. Try to
do it right this time.
Like I said, Your education is lacking and I recommend helping yourself.
Change of subject,.  Vincent never said it to me, sounds like someone
losing track of things, explains much.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia !
No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
are not sending him service.
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Change of subject.  But amusing this time, the admission Lenin, the
Bolsheviks, were serving a purpose to the Germans, which of course
explains the money and weapons the Germans gave his movement.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Then add legitimacy by negotiating with them for the end of the war,
then popularity for ending the war and by reducing the size of Russia
made it easier for the Bolsheviks to consolidate power.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
contaminate the Russian leadership.
Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
up in power.
Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's.
Change of subject.  As for pink, sunburn does that to many people.
Is that a code word for being a communist?
Some of our greatest loses of secrets was through your establishments.
Change of subject.  Anyway when did I take ownership of the establishments?
When did you abandon your establishment cell?
Even the Jews are touchy about what you are told.
Change of subject but an interesting revelation of Vincent's prejudices.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
Solomon wrote the above.
I see. It was only a way way thing.
Change to incoherent subject.  The Germans gave the Bolsheviks money,
weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Damn good thing the USA didn't allow Germany to set up German language
schools for you.
Change of subject, anyway it would be more useful these days to learn
Chinese.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks
residing in Germany?
Solomon wrote the above.
Nope.
Still trying to reply to stuff I never wrote, I see.  The Germans gave
the Bolsheviks
money, weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
There you go again.
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
Perhaps you can show either or neither.
Vincent makes the claim, Vincent cannot back it up.
Th history backs it up and nothinbg backs up your prevarications. Do you
always make up things as you go?
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest
you wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring
pictures instead of wasting our time?
The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
Is such were the case ...
Is such were the case? It is being proved.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
I am sure you would be incapable of any quality.
Good to know Vincent is disapproving, that shows people are on the
right (left?) track.
Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Geoffrey Sinclair
2021-02-23 08:06:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it happen.
Actually no. Feel free to provide the examples of the British selling
weapons to the Bolsheviks.
Feel free to prove otherwise.
Easy, no evidence has been provided to show weapons sales by
Britain to the Bolsheviks during and just after WWI. The British sold
weapons to Russia, not the Bolsheviks and sent an expeditionary
force in 1919 against the Bolsheviks.
Post by Vincent
The Brits sold weapons to anyone that wanted them, as does USA, Russia et
al.
So show the sales to Bolsheviks during and just after WWI

When it comes to Germany there us plenty of evidence of support for
the Bolsheviks.

https://www.dw.com/en/how-germany-got-the-russian-revolution-off-the-ground/a-41195312

For a quick introduction.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2625787?seq=1

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/opinion/was-lenin-a-german-agent.html

https://medium.com/history-of-yesterday/when-germany-funded-the-russian-revolution-428d369f27ff
Post by Vincent
Feel free to provide examples of British money to the Bolsheviks.
There is an open book on that..Read it amnd stop the idiot responses.
Vincent apparently cannot provide details from an open book.
Post by Vincent
The Russian government owed Britain about as much as Britain
owed the USA, the Bolsheviks repudiated the debts of the Russian
government which made it harder for the British to handle the
problems of the next 30 years.
Make up your fucking mind...
The Bolsheviks were Russians!
There was the Russian government which Britain dealt with and loaned
money to. Then the Bolsheviks took over, it is in all the history books,
the new government changed a lot of the rules. You may want to read
up on what happened.

Vincent, groups like Antifa and Proud Boys are Americans, however there
are significant differences.
Post by Vincent
I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front yard?
Still trying to get rid of yours?
If I had one, I definitely would give it to you.
Do not be so shy, admit ownership, anyway the target range
needs some new decor.
Post by Vincent
It would give you and your kind something to masturbate to.
Vincent projects onto other people.
Post by Vincent
Think of Vincent as someone who needs to keep changing the
subject when asked for proof.
Think of GS as too damned lazy to do his own homework. The Archives of any
good News media has published it all a number of times.
So no evidence provided.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
A bit strong, they were allies.
Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
Post by Vincent
Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
war mode.
I am glad you are convinced that that was a one year war.
Change of subject. August to November 1918 is one year?
So you are claiming a several month war.
Actually Vincent claimed August to November in one year, time to
project it onto others.
Post by Vincent
If that is true, why not show us how to do that in the ME and elsewhere.
Popcorn and coke timing for wars could become quite popular.
Vincent your idea of time, your idea of entertainment.
Post by Vincent
Now if we can only make the mess in the ME and elsewhere into just one
year conflicts.
Change of subject. Difficult given the definition of one year being used.
Do try to keep up. I bet your folks were beside themselves trying to
educate you.
Keeping up with a stationary object is simple enough. I suggest keeping
your education experiences out of things. I note the cut and paste of my
text, keep that up, repeating words is a step to understanding.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
Your point?
No troop movements home to counter Bolsheviks.
Could it be that you changed timelines to fit whatever tall story you are
selling?
Vincent defined August to November is a year, then projects onto
others. It avoids providing evidence.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
a Bolshevik one.
Wow. We have another fact shoved down the 1984 memory hole.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
There is that projection again.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
allow the invasion of southern Germany.
So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
Are you kidding?
No.
Then you are prevaricating!
Vincent as truth bringer is amusing. Just remember no proof is
proof for Vincent.
Post by Vincent
Look it up.
I did.
You are supposed to keep you mind and eyes open when researching. Try to
do it right this time.
Note Vincent is unable to provide any evidence, easy to do with no research.
Post by Vincent
Like I said, Your education is lacking and I recommend helping yourself.
Change of subject,. Vincent never said it to me, sounds like someone
losing track of things, explains much.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Words repeated, understanding still a while away.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia !
No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
are not sending him service.
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Change of subject. But amusing this time, the admission Lenin, the
Bolsheviks, were serving a purpose to the Germans, which of course
explains the money and weapons the Germans gave his movement.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Projecting again. Vincent needs to ignore inconvenient facts.
Post by Vincent
Then add legitimacy by negotiating with them for the end of the war,
then popularity for ending the war and by reducing the size of Russia
made it easier for the Bolsheviks to consolidate power.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Projecting again. Vincent needs to ignore inconvenient facts.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
contaminate the Russian leadership.
Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
up in power.
Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's.
Change of subject. As for pink, sunburn does that to many people.
Is that a code word for being a communist?
Vincent as truth bringer you should know.
Post by Vincent
Some of our greatest loses of secrets was through your establishments.
Change of subject. Anyway when did I take ownership of the
establishments?
When did you abandon your establishment cell?
Change of subject again. Just because you are going nowhere is no reason
to assume anyone else is.
Post by Vincent
Even the Jews are touchy about what you are told.
Change of subject but an interesting revelation of Vincent's prejudices.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
More projection, no understanding.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian
revolutionaries
weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
Solomon wrote the above.
I see. It was only a way way thing.
Change to incoherent subject. The Germans gave the Bolsheviks money,
weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Vincent projects.
Post by Vincent
Damn good thing the USA didn't allow Germany to set up German language
schools for you.
Change of subject, anyway it would be more useful these days to learn
Chinese.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Cut and paste of other people's words seems to be about the
limit of Vincent's skills.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing
in Germany?
Solomon wrote the above.
Nope.
Still trying to reply to stuff I never wrote, I see. The Germans gave the
Bolsheviks money, weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
There you go again.
Reporting the facts does that to people.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
Perhaps you can show either or neither.
Vincent makes the claim, Vincent cannot back it up.
Th history backs it up and nothinbg backs up your prevarications. Do you
always make up things as you go?
Vincent makes the claim, with no evidence as the idea of proof. Vincent
has a make believe world and projects it onto others.
Post by Vincent
Post by Geoffrey Sinclair
Post by Vincent
Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest
you wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring
pictures instead of wasting our time?
The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
Is such were the case ...
Is such were the case? It is being proved.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Projecting again. Sad that cut and paste skills are paraded as a
breakthrough.
Post by Vincent
I am sure you would be incapable of any quality.
Good to know Vincent is disapproving, that shows people are on the
right (left?) track.
Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Vincent
2021-02-24 04:21:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 2/23/2021 2:06 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:

Yaaaawn... You are way too much like Rudy and his other puppets.
Keith Willshaw
2021-02-22 12:09:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.

In 1917 with the Feb revolution in Russia the Social Democrats took over
the Government and had the policy of continuing the war. In order to
disrupt this the German government agreed to permit 32 Russian citizens
to travel in a sealed train carriage through their territory, among them
Lenin and his wife.

Note the importance of it being a sealed train, they very much wanted to
avoid Lenin deciding to disembark in either Austro-Hungary or Germany.

The group travelled by train from Zürich to Sassnitz, proceeding by
ferry to Trelleborg, Sweden, and from there to the Haparanda–Tornio
border crossing and then to Helsinki before taking the final train to
Petrograd. Once there Lenin raised the expected hell which put the
Bolsheviks in power and Russia out of the war.

The unexpected side effect was to send a message to the Spartacists in
Germany that a left wing revolution against an unpopular regime could be
successful.
Jim Wilkins
2021-02-22 13:06:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:s106tc$hvl$***@dont-email.me...
...
The unexpected side effect was to send a message to the Spartacists in
Germany that a left wing revolution against an unpopular regime could be
successful.

-------------------

And the backlash to that Marxist uprising led to the socialist but fiercely
anti-Marxist Third Reich:
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/meet-freikorps-vanguard-terror-1918-1923
Vincent
2021-02-23 02:18:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Vincent
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
Even Charlie Chaplin!
Post by Keith Willshaw
In 1917 with the Feb revolution in Russia the Social Democrats took over
the Government  and had the policy of continuing the war. In order to
disrupt this the German government agreed to permit 32 Russian citizens
to travel in a sealed train carriage through their territory, among them
Lenin and his wife.
Note the importance of it being a sealed train, they very much wanted to
avoid Lenin deciding to disembark in either Austro-Hungary or Germany.
The group travelled by train from Zürich to Sassnitz, proceeding by
ferry to Trelleborg, Sweden, and from there to the Haparanda–Tornio
border crossing and then to Helsinki before taking the final train to
Petrograd. Once there Lenin raised the expected hell which put the
Bolsheviks in power and Russia out of the war.
The unexpected side effect was to send a message to the Spartacists in
Germany that a left wing revolution against an unpopular regime could be
successful.
Now this I can agree with.
Keith Willshaw
2021-02-24 01:09:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Vincent
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
Even Charlie Chaplin!
YOU are the one who claimed the Germans would hve executed him - Doh !

In 1918 Charlie Chaplin was making films in the USA for First National.

He moved to Switzerland in 1953 after his US rentry permit was removed
on political grounds. McCarthyism ruled, freedom of speech and democracy
were not protected if you were considered left wing. A shameful period
for the USA but a boost for Europe as we got many top US Artists
settling over here in France, the UK and Switzerland.
Vincent
2021-02-24 04:57:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Vincent
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Vincent
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
Even Charlie Chaplin!
YOU are the one who claimed the Germans would hve executed him - Doh !
Germany would very likely would have executed him. Switzerland is NOT
Germany and is definitely a neutral country that is safe haven for about
anyone that will abide by Swiss law. Even the International Congress of
Jews almost got expelled by declaring war on Germany from Neutral
Switzerland.
Post by Keith Willshaw
In 1918 Charlie Chaplin was making films in the USA for First National.
In what way does that keep him from moving to Switzerland?
Post by Keith Willshaw
He moved to Switzerland in 1953 after his US rentry permit was removed
on political grounds. McCarthyism ruled,
Actually Wisconsin Senator McCarthy has been proven correct over the
decades. Good old Jolly England could use a fellow like him. Richard
Nixon was part of the UN-American activities committee. Did you forget
that at that time we were fighting a Police action against Communist
North Korea, Communist China and against Communist Russia in the air
war? I do believe that was a UN action in which your country et al were
involved.

freedom of speech and democracy
Post by Keith Willshaw
were not protected if you were considered left wing.
It sure wasn't. We had a lot of sabotage of many critical things by the
left. Shooting the bastards was a badge of honor for our great nation.
We should have gotten George Bush in those purges. First Prescott Bush
dealt with the Nazi's selling them submarine fuel, Then Jr runs a
perfectly good airplane out of fuel without firing shot and gets a
medal, Also ends up running the CIA during its worst Productions. then
the SOB invents the "Homeland Security" which lords it over the other 17
agencies. Of course Homeland Security is in the hands of the Marxist
Democrat Swamp. The same folks that have allowed the massive security
intrusions to every American Military body and damned near every
Civilian enterprise. Lots more of the Marxist assholes in both our
Governments. Harry Truman invented the NSA to curb the Roosevelt
OSS/CIA. Reagan invented the NSI...They keep inventing more agencies to
stop the corruption in the already operating agencies. Whatta Joke.


A shameful period
Post by Keith Willshaw
for the USA but a boost for Europe
And look what you folks did with it. Whatta fucking mess. We are in a
mess, but you folks make us look like amateurs when it comes to a mess.
By the way...DON"T call us for your next fucked up war.

as we got many top US Artists
Post by Keith Willshaw
settling over here in France, the UK and Switzerland.
I have Swiss citizenship and I Question that statement.
You got the OFFAL of our entertainment industry.
Dean Markley
2021-02-24 15:47:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Vincent
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Vincent
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
Even Charlie Chaplin!
YOU are the one who claimed the Germans would hve executed him - Doh !
Germany would very likely would have executed him. Switzerland is NOT
Germany and is definitely a neutral country that is safe haven for about
anyone that will abide by Swiss law. Even the International Congress of
Jews almost got expelled by declaring war on Germany from Neutral
Switzerland.
Switzerland is only as neutral as suits it's own interests. During WWII, those interests often coincided with Germany's. As far as the Jews (whom you clearly hate), you need to look at your history again. They did not "declare war" on Germany. It was a worldwide boycott against Germany and was actually called from New York. That was in 1933, so the Jews clearly saw what was coming.
Post by Keith Willshaw
In 1918 Charlie Chaplin was making films in the USA for First National.
In what way does that keep him from moving to Switzerland?
Post by Keith Willshaw
He moved to Switzerland in 1953 after his US rentry permit was removed
on political grounds. McCarthyism ruled,
Actually Wisconsin Senator McCarthy has been proven correct over the
decades. Good old Jolly England could use a fellow like him. Richard
Nixon was part of the UN-American activities committee. Did you forget
that at that time we were fighting a Police action against Communist
North Korea, Communist China and against Communist Russia in the air
war? I do believe that was a UN action in which your country et al were
involved.
freedom of speech and democracy
Post by Keith Willshaw
were not protected if you were considered left wing.
It sure wasn't. We had a lot of sabotage of many critical things by the
left. Shooting the bastards was a badge of honor for our great nation.
We should have gotten George Bush in those purges. First Prescott Bush
dealt with the Nazi's selling them submarine fuel, Then Jr runs a
perfectly good airplane out of fuel without firing shot and gets a
medal, Also ends up running the CIA during its worst Productions. then
the SOB invents the "Homeland Security" which lords it over the other 17
agencies. Of course Homeland Security is in the hands of the Marxist
Democrat Swamp. The same folks that have allowed the massive security
intrusions to every American Military body and damned near every
Civilian enterprise. Lots more of the Marxist assholes in both our
Governments. Harry Truman invented the NSA to curb the Roosevelt
OSS/CIA. Reagan invented the NSI...They keep inventing more agencies to
stop the corruption in the already operating agencies. Whatta Joke.
A shameful period
McCarthy hasn't been proven "correct". He was clearly in the wrong and violated the constitution. As far as the rest of your ranting diatribe, you should reread it and then decide which Bush is the one you want to incriminate. Hint: There's more than one.
Post by Keith Willshaw
for the USA but a boost for Europe
And look what you folks did with it. Whatta fucking mess. We are in a
mess, but you folks make us look like amateurs when it comes to a mess.
By the way...DON"T call us for your next fucked up war.
as we got many top US Artists
Post by Keith Willshaw
settling over here in France, the UK and Switzerland.
I have Swiss citizenship and I Question that statement.
You got the OFFAL of our entertainment industry.
You, Vincent? Defender of the American way? Uber Patriot? And you claim Swiss citizenship? You are a troll, pure and simple.
Geoffrey Sinclair
2021-02-19 11:08:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
The word was an Armistice, but it was a surrender. In the agreement the
Germans agreed to pull their troops out of France, Belgium and Luxembourg
within 15 days, or risk becoming prisoners of the Allies. They had to turn
over their arsenal, including 5,000 artillery pieces, 25,000 machine guns
and 1,700 airplanes, along with 5,000 railroad locomotives, 5,000 trucks
and 150,000 wagons. Germany also had to give up the contested territory of
Alsace-Lorraine. And they agreed to the indignity of Allied forces
occupying German territory along the Rhine, where they would stay until
1930.
You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back and
the Armistice.
https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Conventions_and_Treaties

All part of the armistice terms.
We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The English more so then us.
You can rewrite history all you want, but the facts still remain.
Which show the terms of the armistice were enforced.
England was the perpetrator of continuing that war when Germany tried to
negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody.
So when and what were the negotiation proposals.
Shithead Wilson got America into a war actually perpetrated by the
English!
Actually it was Austria Hungary, backed by Germany, versus Serbia,
backed by Russia, backed by France with Britain sitting outside things
until the brilliant German plan to invade Belgium was done, given
Britain had a treaty with Belgium.

The Austria-Hungary government rejected a Serbian note that
gave them just about all their demands. The Serbian government
pointing out that a relatively minor part would require them to break
their own laws.

America found itself involved via attacks on its shipping and the
Zimmerman telegram.
Some of the American states refused to allow the Federal Government to
send their citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was NOT totally a
coalition. The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within Germany at the
Behest of the English.
The Bolsheviks created a revolution within Russia with the aid of the
German government. The revolutions in Germany were local, not
outside organised.
German Troops had to return to Germany in order to put down this
revolution.
So the Germans were not defeated but betrayed from within?
To this day there are Bolsheviks within the English Government.
So name them.
The Russians were kind enough to publish papers highlighting this
connection back then.
So in where are the copies of these 1918 or 1919 or so
documents?
Also the Russians removed themselves from that war.
Actually Lenin removed Russia from the war. look up the terms of
the treaty involved and then compare it to Versailles.
Germany could well have overrun France at that time but instead chose to
negotiate an end.
So detail the negotiations, which no doubt explain the 1918 offensives
and the condition the German army was in after them, followed by the
breaching of the Hindenburg line. The way the German army began
falling to pieces.

And the German army in the east was rather busy during 1917, keeping
an eye on the Russians and trying to funnel resources towards Germany.
Interesting to note even with the Ukraine available how Germany ran out
of food.
People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
So the German government is presiding over widespread famine but
continues fighting and that is someone else's fault?
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
I like to know who this Honorable German leader was?
If you are too fucking stupid to know that! I am wasting my time with a
fool.
So why bother to reply at all?

So in other words no evidence.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Keith Willshaw
2021-02-18 09:27:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
Nations Wilson.
As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions and
returned home, their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval
base at Scapa Floe and they were forbidden to have military aircraft.
The mistake the Allies made was not demanding unconditional surrender
and rubbing the their noses in the stink they made for themselves.

The German war plan of course was to starve Britain out of the war, turn
about is fair play but the reality of German starvation was that it was
self inflicted. German agricultural production collapsed as the horses
German farmers relied upon for farming were seized by the Army who also
seized all stocks of the Nitrate fertilisers for making explosives. In
contrast the British mobilised women in the British Land Army to ensure
that every possible scrap of land was used for agriculture. By wars end
23,000 women had been conscripted for this purpose and the munitions
factories workers were 90% female.
Vincent
2021-02-19 07:29:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Vincent
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar
was a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
Nations Wilson.
As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions and
returned home,
As agreed on by the Armistice.

their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval

Just more double dealing by the English. The very long history of double
dealing and inbred Aristocracy leadership is what led to ending the
English Empire. Sadly My America is now living somewhat the same strategies.
Post by Keith Willshaw
base at Scapa Floe and they were forbidden to have military aircraft.
The mistake the Allies made was not demanding unconditional surrender
and rubbing the their noses in the stink they made for themselves.
Uh Huh, So as per usual the entire war was blamed on one small country.
We were all guilty to some percentage. England and the French have been
up to their eyeballs in creating 2 world wars. America had riots in the
streets of its major cities against being involved. We should have let
the combatants duke it out or it is more likely to have been a
negotiated armistice that would have prevented a bigger WWI and perhaps
totally negated a WWII'
Post by Keith Willshaw
The German war plan of course was to starve Britain out of the war
You gotta be kidding? Germany certainly had no designs on taking England
in either World war.

, turn
Post by Keith Willshaw
about is fair play but the reality of German starvation was that it was
self inflicted. German agricultural production collapsed as the horses
German farmers relied upon for farming were seized by the Army who also
seized all stocks of the Nitrate fertilisers for making explosives. In
contrast the British mobilised women in the British Land Army to ensure
that every possible scrap of land was used for agriculture. By wars end
23,000 women had been conscripted for this purpose and the munitions
factories workers were 90% female.
I guess you forgot the thousands of shiploads of American Guns and
Butter that kept you afloat in both wars. Germany did not have that
kindness extended toward it. Not only was a lot of England inbred
Nobility bad leaders, but much of it was the Offal of Germany inbred
nobility that had integrated with.

I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
England's Battle in WWII.

The Problem is the American Soldier
He is overpaid
He is over sexed
and He is over here.

One of Winston Churchill's wisdom's. Along of course with his many fuck
ups. Such as the mess in South Africa and the Boer war. Just a result of
English Nobleman being dead broke and bought like a centerpiece by an
American Jewish business Millionaire that had a Daughter that wanted a
Noble name and gave birth to Son that the English venerated no matter
how stupid he became.

Dunkirk, Where Hitler in WWII gave England a pass so that they could
take their soldiers home and not be decimated. It is thought by some
that Hitler actually thought the English would side against the Russian
Bolsheviks.

America separated from The British Empire in order to get away from such
strategies and now are in the same decline that destroyed the "sun never
goes down on the Empire".
Keith Willshaw
2021-02-19 10:13:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
England's Battle in WWII.
The Problem is the American Soldier
He is overpaid
He is over sexed
and He is over here.
That was a not the attitude of the British Government, armed forces or
most people. Churchill wanted the USA as an ally and when that happened
he rejoiced. As for the normal people one of the biggest exports in 1945
was in the form of war brides.

In fact the first use of that phrase is attributed to a US Official
badgering British people about what they felt about the US Troops. One
person replied

“Well, they’re over-dressed, they’re over-paid, they’re over-sexed, and
they’re over here.”

In turned out he was a comedian and the second part of what he said is
rarely quoted

"There are objections to the English soldier too, he said we are
Underpaid, underdressed, undersexed and—under Eisenhower!"

This is called having a sense of humour, you may want to try it some time.
Ramsman
2021-02-19 11:06:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Vincent
I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
England's Battle in WWII.
The Problem is the American Soldier
He is overpaid
He is over sexed
and He is over here.
That was a not the attitude of the British Government, armed forces or
most people. Churchill wanted the USA as an ally and when that happened
he rejoiced. As for the normal people one of the biggest exports in 1945
was in the form of war brides.
In fact the first use of that phrase is attributed to a US Official
badgering British people about what they felt about the US Troops. One
person replied
“Well, they’re over-dressed, they’re over-paid, they’re over-sexed, and
they’re over here.”
In turned out he was a comedian and the second part of what he said is
rarely quoted
"There are objections to the English soldier too, he said we are
Underpaid, underdressed, undersexed and—under Eisenhower!"
This is called having a sense of humour, you may want to try it some time.
He must have a sense of humour: practically everything he posts is
laughable.
--
Peter
Geoffrey Sinclair
2021-02-19 11:08:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by Keith Willshaw
It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions and
returned home,
As agreed on by the Armistice.
their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval
Point 14 of the armistice terms,

"4. Surrender of 160 U-boats, 8 light cruisers, 6 Dreadnoughts; the rest of
the fleet to be disarmed and controlled by the Allies in neutral or Allied
harbors. "

The fleet sailed to Scapa Flow.
Post by Vincent
Just more double dealing by the English.
The German fleet at Scapa largely scuttled itself.
Post by Vincent
The very long history of double dealing and inbred Aristocracy leadership
is what led to ending the English Empire. Sadly My America is now living
somewhat the same strategies.
So inbred leadership results in a world wide empire?
Post by Vincent
Post by Keith Willshaw
base at Scapa Floe and they were forbidden to have military aircraft. The
mistake the Allies made was not demanding unconditional surrender and
rubbing the their noses in the stink they made for themselves.
Uh Huh, So as per usual the entire war was blamed on one small country.
Germany is small? Or is that Austria-Hungary?
Post by Vincent
We were all guilty to some percentage.
So your assessment of your current guilt for places like North Korea
and Somalia is?
Post by Vincent
England and the French have been up to their eyeballs in creating 2 world
wars.
Actually for both wars the British were trying to avoid it, WWI saw the
French
caught up in the quick decisive war belief, WWII the French were trying to
avoid.
Post by Vincent
America had riots in the streets of its major cities against being
involved.
So name the cities and dates.

https://depts.washington.edu/antiwar/WW1_reds.shtml

For an idea of those who were against the war.
Post by Vincent
We should have let the combatants duke it out or it is more likely to have
been a negotiated armistice that would have prevented a bigger WWI and
perhaps totally negated a WWII'
Versus exhaustion lays much of Europe open to Communism like
happened to Russia.
Post by Vincent
Post by Keith Willshaw
The German war plan of course was to starve Britain out of the war
You gotta be kidding? Germany certainly had no designs on taking England
in either World war.
That is simply false, the U-boat campaigns for a start, Britain down to
weeks of food in WWI. The pre war fleet build up.
Post by Vincent
, turn
Post by Keith Willshaw
about is fair play but the reality of German starvation was that it was
self inflicted. German agricultural production collapsed as the horses
German farmers relied upon for farming were seized by the Army who also
seized all stocks of the Nitrate fertilisers for making explosives. In
contrast the British mobilised women in the British Land Army to ensure
that every possible scrap of land was used for agriculture. By wars end
23,000 women had been conscripted for this purpose and the munitions
factories workers were 90% female.
I guess you forgot the thousands of shiploads of American Guns and Butter
that kept you afloat in both wars.
Actually not afloat, but more mobilised than otherwise so fewer US
combat units were required, it also shortened the war, versus the
costs of converting combat units back into workers while the US
converted workers into combat units.

Similar for the USSR, the supplies delivered to end 1942 were not
enough to make the difference between staying and leaving the war.
Think of the deaths in Leningrad and Stalingrad as an idea of the
staying power of Stalin's government.
Post by Vincent
Germany did not have that kindness extended toward it.
Actually is did, given it looted occupied Europe for food, exporting
hunger.
Post by Vincent
Not only was a lot of England inbred Nobility bad leaders, but much of it
was the Offal of Germany inbred nobility that had integrated with.
So bad a bunch of leaders they ended up with a rather large empire,
using the then definition of bad.
Post by Vincent
I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
England's Battle in WWII.
Good to know the USA had no reason to fight.
Post by Vincent
The Problem is the American Soldier
He is overpaid
He is over sexed
and He is over here.
Versus Underpaid, under sexed and under Eisenhower.
Post by Vincent
One of Winston Churchill's wisdom's.
So show it was Churchill. Not a British comedian.

http://ww2f.com/threads/origin-of-phrase-overpaid-oversexed-and-over-here.14674/
Post by Vincent
Along of course with his many fuck ups. Such as the mess in South Africa
and the Boer war.
Churchill had nothing to do with the origins or running of the Boer war.
Post by Vincent
Just a result of
English Nobleman being dead broke and bought like a centerpiece by an
American Jewish business Millionaire that had a Daughter that wanted a
Noble name and gave birth to Son that the English venerated no matter how
stupid he became.
So show Jeannie or her father were Jewish.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/29780075?seq=1
Post by Vincent
Dunkirk, Where Hitler in WWII gave England a pass so that they could take
their soldiers home and not be decimated.
The halt order was done by the army, several times actually, and Hitler
endorsed it. The military reasons were extended flanks, tank strengths
and the terrain between where the Germans were and places like
Dunkirk.
Post by Vincent
It is thought by some that Hitler actually thought the English would side
against the Russian Bolsheviks.
I understand the main believer flew to Britain with the intended offer, and
was repudiated.
Post by Vincent
America separated from The British Empire in order to get away from such
strategies
And the 20th century would have played out very differently had the US
still been part of the Empire and so entering the wars when Britain did.
Post by Vincent
and now are in the same decline that destroyed the "sun never goes down on
the Empire".
Not a decline in absolute terms but relative to the rest of the world.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Dean Markley
2021-02-18 14:31:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
War is not just an accounting exercise.
That is balderdash. All modern wars are based on logistics.
Mmmmmmmmm
So???
In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American in
ww2 then a German.
Logistics won that war for one side and lack of logistics lost it for
the other.
Post by SolomonW
http://youtu.be/3n0BpQj9jqc
Post by Vincent
It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
starving to death when they surrendered.
And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
Nations Wilson.
As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
That's a standard line that led to the rise of Hitler in that Germany did not surrender. Your take is ill thought and just not true. Germany was well and truly beaten. The main mistake of the Allies was in not occupying the entire country and inflicting a bit of deserved hardship.
SolomonW
2021-02-19 04:54:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dean Markley
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
Post by Keith Willshaw
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
War is not just an accounting exercise.
That is balderdash. All modern wars are based on logistics.
Mmmmmmmmm
So???
In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American in
ww2 then a German.
Logistics won that war for one side and lack of logistics lost it for
the other.
Post by SolomonW
http://youtu.be/3n0BpQj9jqc
Post by Vincent
It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
starving to death when they surrendered.
And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
Nations Wilson.
As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
Post by SolomonW
Post by Vincent
Post by SolomonW
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
That's a standard line that led to the rise of Hitler in that Germany did not surrender. Your take is ill thought and just not true. Germany was well and truly beaten. The main mistake of the Allies was in not occupying the entire country and inflicting a bit of deserved hardship.
It can be argued that it was too hard or not hard enough.
Keith Willshaw
2021-02-19 10:26:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
It can be argued that it was too hard or not hard enough.
Foch had it right when in 1919 after the signing of the treaty of
Versailles he said.

"This is a capitulation, a treason, it is not peace. It is an armistice
for 20 years"

He was spot on. In recognition of this the French used German POW's to
restore his statue an the armistice site at Compiegne at the end of the
second world war. This time all four allies occupied Germany.
Geoffrey Sinclair
2021-02-19 11:08:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American in
ww2 then a German.
Logistics won that war for one side and lack of logistics lost it for the
other.
Logistics is part, not all.
Post by SolomonW
And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
Armistice!
So far so good.
They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was a dishonor
and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the biggest horses ass
on the planet, President gotta have a league of Nations Wilson.
https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Conventions_and_Treaties
What specifically rates as the dishonour?

I suppose you are aware as the Germans retreated and then left France
they took as much as the could and destroyed much of what they could
not take. Flooding coal mines for example, petty things like destroying
Medieval castles.

So strangely enough the French and Belgians wanted things from
Germany to cover their losses and repair bills. Go look up the
clauses in the treaty of Brest-Litovsk as another example of
treaties of the time.
As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when over
3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits and our
as wipe President Wilson.
Actually the famine started in 1917, the turnip winter, and as for 3
million that is simply adding the deaths before the armistice, the post
war flu and starvation deaths together then adding extras. The civil
death toll to famine from 1914 to 1919 was estimated at around
850,000 by the Germans with 750,000 wartime deaths reported
during the treaty negotiations. Later checks indicate the total is
more likely to be the total flu and famine victims and may be
exaggerated.

The blockade was lifted with the signing of the Versailles treaty in
June 1919.
A war that could have ended much earlier as suggested by an Honorable
German leader.
So name the leader, the dates and the terms offered.
Instead it led us into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also
expected harsh penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is
exactly what they got.
In WWI the Germans imposed a treaty on Russia, in WWII Russia
imposed communist rule on East Germany.

Removing Russia from WWI was why Lenin was moved across Germany
in a sealed rail carriage, so he could be sent to Russia. The WWI treaty
was very useful to Lenin, legitimising his government and allowing him to
consolidate power.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Keith Willshaw
2021-02-18 09:15:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
War is not just an accounting exercise.
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
You may notice a pattern developing here, both Germany and Iraq lost and
both were of course the original aggressors. The V1 was a low cost
weapon and made some sense, the V2 was ludicrous. It was expensive,
required huge amounts of resources and labour and most of those launched
missed their targets by miles. Daftest of all it was not doing anything
to stop the Red Army reaching Berlin or 1000 bomber raids burning out
one German city after another.

The reality is that to win a global war you need an efficient economy,
that of Nazi Germany was far from efficient. Britain and the
Commonwealth alone out prduced Germany in terms of weapons. When you add
in the Soviet and US production it was no contest.

This became apparent during the Battle of Britain. In the air the
fighting was close, in the factories it was a walk over. Throughout the
campaign the RAF remained at full strength, losses in pilots and
aircraft were replaced. Indeed the fact that they had almost 1200 pilots
for the 720 aircraft meant that at the height of fighting men were still
being sent on leave.That was not true of the Luftwaffe.

On Sept 3 1940 while Goering was boasting the RAF was down to its last
100 fighters Hugo Sperrle was touring Luftwaffe Bases in France and
finding many of the units were seriously under strength, the Lufwaffe
was seriously under strength as its training and repair systems just
couldnt keep pace. A damaged Me-109 would be sent back to the factory in
Germany for repair. An RAF fighter would be shipped to a local repair
centre and replaced from stock.

Imagine the reaction of Luftwaffe pilots over London in September to be
hit by waves of fighters some of them big wings of 60 or more aircraft.

When you look at the nuclear program the Germans fatally damaged it by
splitting the limited resources available across multiple teams. There
was just about enough heavy water for one reactor but not enough for
two. The prototype they built at Haigerloch in 1945 was hopeless, There
was not enough nuclear fuel or heavy water to achieve criticality and it
had no control rods ! They intended to control it by varying the level
of heavy water in the pile.

Compare and contrast with the alied approach where the UK, USA and
Canada pooled their resources. The team lead by Enrico Fermi who built
Chicago Pile No 1 under a disused rackets court in just 6 months.
SolomonW
2021-02-19 04:54:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
The V1 was a low cost
weapon and made some sense,
Cost/benefit analysis it was a brilliant weapon, its very lucky that
Germany did not have it in bulk during the battle of Britain.
a425couple
2021-02-23 16:17:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SolomonW
War is not just an accounting exercise.
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
You may notice a pattern developing here, ---
When you look at the nuclear program the Germans fatally damaged it by
splitting the limited resources available across multiple teams. There
was just about enough heavy water for one reactor but not enough for
two. The prototype they built at Haigerloch in 1945 was hopeless, There
was not enough nuclear fuel or heavy water to achieve criticality and it
had no control rods ! They intended to control it by varying the level
of heavy water in the pile.
Interesting.
In the Turtledove novel, The Germans got some of the
uranium from a destroyed 'Lizard' A bomb, and then
in doing their research & development, failed to
safely control it and 'cooked' all their 'experts' in
a runaway reaction.
Jim Wilkins
2021-02-23 16:56:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"a425couple" wrote in message news:***@news2.newsguy.com...

Interesting.
In the Turtledove novel, The Germans got some of the
uranium from a destroyed 'Lizard' A bomb, and then
in doing their research & development, failed to
safely control it and 'cooked' all their 'experts' in
a runaway reaction.

------------------------------

That's plausible because they didn't provide for delayed neutrons.

In reality Hitler applied his standard technique of dividing responsibility
and making the parties compete for power, resources and his favor, survival
of the fittest. This seriously crippled them when available resources were
inadequate, for example nickel, tungsten, uranium and heavy water.
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=176230
a425couple
2021-02-15 03:54:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by a425couple
from
https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Not close at all.
A team of scientists—nuclear physicists, chemists, mathematicians,
explosive experts, and others—who, just from knowing about uranium
fission, could work out how to make a nuclear bomb. Hell, they didn’t
even get a working reactor!
The funds to make this possible. Remember, it took $2,000,000,000 1945
American dollars to build the first 4 nukes (Trinity, Little Boy, Fat
Man, and “the demon core”).
The resources to make this happen. The Manhattan project, for example,
used HUGE amounts of electricity to run the isotope separation plants.
In the 1950s these plants used **8%** of American electricity. Neither
the Japanese nor the Germans could build all the extra power plants;
they just did not have the manpower to build them, nor did they have the
copper to install the generators and then transmit the power to the
plants needed.
----
Post by a425couple
The allies had developed a workable ‘pile’ (early reactor) in
1942 and with 500 scientists working on it developed a bomb in July
1945. -----
Has anyone around here read the Harry Turtledove
alternate history books "Worldwar: In the Balance"
and "Worldwar: Tilting the Balance" ?
(Worldwar series Book 1)

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008OYPX1U/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldwar:_In_the_Balance

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/101527.In_the_Balance

Pleasant enough science fiction reading, that has in
the middle of our time line WWII / May 1942 an advance
set of aliens (kind of like Lizards) arrive at Earth
and try to conquer us for colonization. Almost
all humans start mostly cooperating with each other.
Anyway, the connection to the above is the USA project
at Chicago, had to move to Denver before it got
seriously close to critical mass.

Also, The aliens had set off 3 nukes for EMP,
and then thinking "shock and awe" might work,
blasted Washington DC and Berlin with A-bombs.
But, big BUT, a semi conventional big Nazi shell
hit one of the big alien spaceships that stored
multiple of their A-bombs and a conventional explosion
scattered some of their bomb core uranium.
So, humans know KNOW, what will work.
Jim Wilkins
2021-02-15 12:40:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"a425couple" wrote in message news:***@news1.newsguy.com...

During the Korean War, U.S. troops who were pursuing the fleeing North
Korean army found a huge, artificial lake in a relatively remote part of
North Korea. Two hydroelectric dams impounded the lake, but they were
not connected to the North’s power grid! This complex remained a mystery
until long after the war ended. Finally, a Japanese scientist admitted
that the dams were built by his country in World War Two as power
sources for an atomic bomb project. ...
James Welch

--------------------------------

The scientist may have been bragging that they were as advanced as the West.
Japan suffered from lagging behind their ally Germany in technical matters
such as radar and sub/antisub tactics, while the Allies successfully kept
up. A more likely justification for building the isolated hydroelectric
plants is to make aluminum for aircraft and nitric acid for explosives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hall%E2%80%93H%C3%A9roult_process

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland%E2%80%93Eyde_process
Loading...