Britain Going it Alone (off topic, split) - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The Second World War (1939-1945).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14175186
Yes that was a pretty big advantage but technically "Radar" was not exclusive to Britain. Almost every country had them but what made radar a great weapon for Britain was its organization. With radar stations covering areas strategically rather than anarchically and being subordinate to the fighter command and dedicated men committed to the operations of radar.

Basically Britain was first nation to realize the true potential of this recent invention.
#14175191
fuser wrote:Can you differentiate between immediate blockade effect and continued blockade effect. Do you know that during the drive to Moscow Germany also happen to catch Ukranian farms and we are discussing a scenario where there is no Barbarossa. or are you saying that my sources are wrong? If that so please provide how so?

Riiiiight, Britain by itself with its blockade would doom Germany which has agreements with not only the USSR but entire Europe as well. It doesn't matter whether Germany controlled Western Russia or had trade with it, one point remains unshakable: Britain will not defeat Germany.

Easier than Africa? yes but can they support large number of troops there when simultaneously maintaining similar numbers in Africa? a big no.

I don't know if they could support two fronts.

Fascists are so cute. When can't defend their hero who was brought up in the argument by them only, they will post completely nonsensical and irrelevant things about their nightmare i.e. Stalin either about his dick or whatever. But good to see that they still can't defend their hero and are just pissed about it.

No, Rommel proved on the ground that Germany could kick Britain's ass in North Africa and I don't see any other non-fascists claiming otherwise, much less that he was an incompetent fool. It's only delusional commies like yourself who have some kind of inferiority complex whenever German achievements in the war are mentioned that make you enter a fit. I remember you saying you "fucking hate him man, fucking hate him" in some other thread referring to Hitler. So yeah, your sympathies and hatreds are well-known and they're worth shit when you throw them into a historical subject. I don't know why I'm even pointing this out.

Are you lacking reading comprehension tonight only or is it a common thing for you. Check back the numbers for "crusader"

Axis : 119000 Allies : 118000, advantage in number Axis for this particular battle even though it was a very small advantage but completley demolishes your argument regarding superior numbers.

So yeah don't expect to make insane comments like "Britain sucked ass against Germany in land battles" and hope that it won't be thrashed.

Yeah, whatever, I meant they were poorly supported and Hitler completely forgot about the importance of the North African front.
#14175198
People.... Hitler wanted an armistice with the UK.... he never intended to fight them in the first place....and no the German Navy is not good enough to invade the British Isles.
#14175207
Preston Cole wrote:Riiiiight, Britain by itself with its blockade would doom Germany which has agreements with not only the USSR but entire Europe as well.
It doesn't matter whether Germany controlled Western Russia or had trade with it, one point remains unshakable: Britain will not defeat Germany.


Obviously as I have already given you historical examples and facts which you haven't even tried to contest. And blockade is not the only thing beside Germany is not in control of Western Russia here.

Finally of course its unshakable for you as hardly anyone changes his stance over an internet debate. Its not surprising and is quite predictable.

I don't know if they could support two fronts.


Who Germany? or You are talking about Britain which maintained several off shore fronts historically unlike germany.

No, Rommel proved on the ground that Germany could kick Britain's ass in North Africa and I don't see any other non-fascists claiming otherwise, much less that he was an incompetent fool.


You have serious reading comprehension issues, when did I said that fascists claimed that he was a fool?

And after all your blabbering you still are completely unable to defend your "hero".

Yeah, whatever, I meant they were poorly supported and Hitler completely forgot about the importance of the North African front.


So your stance keeps getting changing every time your erroneous comments are caught off. First UK can't beat Germany in land battles, proved wrong, then say UK had the numbers every time, proved wrong then say above, how fucking pathetic.

And no Hitler never forgot African front, it was the most publicized front relative to its size in German propaganda but what stopped Germany was logistical problems which German fanboys are ignoring here in order to meet the requirements of their fantasy.

Edit :

Travesety wrote:People.... Hitler wanted an armistice with the UK.


There are legitimate doubts for how serious Hitler was for peace with Britain beside Britain wasn't going to accept any peace offer from Germany until she rolls back all her gains made from this war.
#14175216
You have serious reading comprehension issues, when did I said that fascists claimed that he was a fool?

I don't think I'm the one with reading comprehension issues here, man...

And after all your blabbering you still are completely unable to defend your "hero".

Why would I need to defend him from a delusional commie?
#14175219
I don't think I'm the one with reading comprehension issues here, man...


Of course you have as demonstrated twice in this very thread only.

1. Didn't payed attention to the numbers posted on operation crusader and made an ignorant comment about numbers after that post.
2. You attributed to me something that I never wrote.

i.e. serious reading comprehension problems.

Why would I need to defend him from a delusional commie?


You also don't need to defend Germany from a delusional commie but still you are doing exactly that. Please don't lie to yourself at least.

Fascists, can't even take a criticism of their revered heroes.
#14175241
There are legitimate doubts for how serious Hitler was for peace with Britain beside Britain wasn't going to accept any peace offer from Germany until she rolls back all her gains made from this war.


The point is that Hitler wasn't a retard and recognized that a war with the British Empire wouldn't be winnable. Ofcourse the Germans would develop nukes eventually if they are not at war with the USSR and America. And by 1945 London would be obliterated. The Royal Navy would still survive though.
#14175244
@ Preston Cole

Yes you are as you didn't even tried to defend your blooper number one and point 2 still stands, you attributed to me something that I never said or can you quote me?

And about being dense of course I am and much more than that to you right now, only rule II is stopping you to let it all out after all I criticized your "hero" , a criticism so grounded in reality that not even a half hearted attempt has been made to defend your hero.

@ Travesty

Its really hard to say, I am still not sure if he was really serious but I am open to suggestion in this case. Your point is correct but the dilemma for Hitler was that Britain won't accept a peace until Germany rolls back all her gains made through the war.

By 1945 Germany was no where near a working Nuclear Weapon.
#14175246
Britian did play an active role in the Manhattan project. But without America in the war I doubt that the British Empire could develop nukes on their own fast enough. And they (ze Germans) where very close to developing nukes by 1945 without a total war on two fronts the Germans would invest more resources into their weapons programme. then load that shit onto a V2 and watch London burn.
Last edited by Travesty on 17 Feb 2013 17:27, edited 1 time in total.
#14175258
Travesty wrote:The German nuclear programme went back to the 30's.


Doesn't matter. By 1942 when this British project was miles ahead of German projects.

@ Preston cole

Fuser already wrote:Of course you have as demonstrated twice in this very thread only.

1. Didn't payed attention to the numbers posted on operation crusader and made an ignorant comment about numbers after that post.
2. You attributed to me something that I never wrote.

i.e. serious reading comprehension problems.


pay more attention or was this your reading comprehension error no.3? and still waiting for you to quote me or can't even prove such simple things unless you are obviously wrong once again.

Also I am so sorry that I criticized your hero, I had no idea it would have such an effect.
#14175261
Fuser.

The allied nuclear programme was developed largely by America, and was a cooperative effort between America, Britian and Canada. In this scenario Britian doesn't have those resources.
#14175263
Did you followed the link I posted?

I am using 1942 to compare both countries as that was the year when British program was subsumed into Manhatten project.
Last edited by fuser on 17 Feb 2013 17:40, edited 1 time in total.
#14175266
This is getting weird. It's like you have an obsession to prove the big bad fascist wrong (but since you said that "I hate Hitler, really hate him man" thing some time ago, it's to be expected).

You said Rommel was an incompetent fool for whatever reasons (some French Fry said he was too megalomaniac), I replied saying that no non-fascist (NOT FASCIST!11!!1) would ever class Rommel as an incompetent fool aside from some particularly delusional commies (oh, whoever may that be?), to which you replied that you never said Fascists classed him as a fool (?). Clear enough?

Rommel together with Guderian and Manstein was at the top of the Blitzkrieg clique in Germany, often times being the very spearhead of the German armored columns in the Battle of France, driving ahead of the rest of the tanks to the point where he had to wait for them to catch up since he was no longer within communications range. Not that you give a fuck about facts...
Last edited by Siberian Fox on 18 Feb 2013 09:53, edited 2 times in total. Reason: Rule two warned.
#14175268
The British aren't being subsumed into Manahattan here though. And the German programme aint changing, they where very advanced by 1945 as the allies and the Soviets had a race for German nuclear research and scientists after the war.
#14175275
Preston Cole wrote:This is getting weird. It's like you have an obsession to prove the big bad fascist wrong (but since you said that "I hate Hitler, really hate him man" thing some time ago, it's to be expected).


As you might note this thread isn't about me. So what about sticking to the topic, is it a very hard thing to do? And oh yes I do remember that comment and clearly you have no idea about the context but then not that I am ashamed of that remark on fucking hitler.

But really I am not bringing him up here but you did brought irrelevance here in the form of Stalin etc.

Also Yeah my mistake, wipe off point 2 and add it to my list but still your argument makes no sense, in the same breath you say that no non fascists and then its only delusional commies. What are delusional commies if not non fascists?

Finally I am not talking about Rommel in France but Africa

@ Travesty

And what makes you think that Britain will not pursue their project without Americans?

Oh God I'm getting so hot thinking about all of th[…]

I'm having trouble to see how the First Amendment […]

What is Fascism

Fascism is right-wing nationalism.

Which assistance programs are you talking about e[…]