What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Was Rommel all that?

marvin martian

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2020
Messages
9,017
Reaction score
14,730
Points
2,288
Location
Texas Hill Country
Rommel lost in North Africa. People say he failed because he wasn't supported, but a good general would've taken the lack of support in count.

Then Rommel was given the job of fortifying the European coast against invasion. D-Day happened and the allies invaded. Rommel failed in that too.

That's why his superiors killed him.
 

Mushroom

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
1,739
Reaction score
576
Points
198
Location
Near Baghdad By The Bay, California
Hard to know what might have been if Hitler hadn't declared war on the US and the US stayed out of Europe. Hitler might have been able to strangle Britain eventually and they could not have retaken Europe. Brits might have held North Africa, maybe. Hitler could not have defeated the USSR so they may have signed a peace treaty and Hitler withdrew to their half of Poland. Hitler and Stalin could then have split Asia and Europe between them. Who knows.

The thing is, the moment Germany attacked the Soviets, there was never going to be a peace treaty until one or the other was defeated. No more than a peace treaty was possible between the US and Japan in that war.

Germany could have made peace treaties with the UK and US. However, all of the Allied Powers had agreed to no separate peace deals, and the war became an all or nothing affair. The only nation that 100% burned all peace deals with the allies was Japan. By simultaneously attacking the US and UK and their brutal behavior there was no way either of those countries would have accepted any kind of peace deal short of their defeat.

People tend to forget that the Japanese were brutal occupiers. Massacres and war crimes were all to common, especially against the Europeans captured. Tens of thousands killed in mass executions, women forced into prostitution in government brothels, Starvation and torture were common facts of life for even civilians held prisoner by Japan. This can be seen clearly in Eric Liddell, who was later one of the main characters in the award winning movie "Chariots of Fire". A Scottish missionary who had been in China as part of a mission, he was interned by the Japanese in 1941 and died in 1945. Primarily from starvation and poor health because of his captivity. And in 1924 he had won a gold medal at the Olympics.

But war between the US and Germany was coming. Much as it was in WWI even before the Zimmerman Telegram. Increased aggression towards neutral US shipping, and actually firing on ships in out territorial waters was already pushing the two sides towards war. And this can be seen in the US because they returned to conscription in the Summer of 1940. Well over a year before they entered the war. Of course, then they were expecting one from Germany, not Japan.

The accepted belief among most was that the US would enter that war because of Germany, and that Japan would then jump in afterwards. Not what actually happened, which was the reverse.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
15,514
Reaction score
2,744
Points
245
Location
Virginia
The thing is, the moment Germany attacked the Soviets, there was never going to be a peace treaty until one or the other was defeated. No more than a peace treaty was possible between the US and Japan in that war.

Germany could have made peace treaties with the UK and US. However, all of the Allied Powers had agreed to no separate peace deals, and the war became an all or nothing affair. The only nation that 100% burned all peace deals with the allies was Japan. By simultaneously attacking the US and UK and their brutal behavior there was no way either of those countries would have accepted any kind of peace deal short of their defeat.

People tend to forget that the Japanese were brutal occupiers. Massacres and war crimes were all to common, especially against the Europeans captured. Tens of thousands killed in mass executions, women forced into prostitution in government brothels, Starvation and torture were common facts of life for even civilians held prisoner by Japan. This can be seen clearly in Eric Liddell, who was later one of the main characters in the award winning movie "Chariots of Fire". A Scottish missionary who had been in China as part of a mission, he was interned by the Japanese in 1941 and died in 1945. Primarily from starvation and poor health because of his captivity. And in 1924 he had won a gold medal at the Olympics.

But war between the US and Germany was coming. Much as it was in WWI even before the Zimmerman Telegram. Increased aggression towards neutral US shipping, and actually firing on ships in out territorial waters was already pushing the two sides towards war. And this can be seen in the US because they returned to conscription in the Summer of 1940. Well over a year before they entered the war. Of course, then they were expecting one from Germany, not Japan.

The accepted belief among most was that the US would enter that war because of Germany, and that Japan would then jump in afterwards. Not what actually happened, which was the reverse.
I don't think I disagree with most of what you wrote except the separate peace between Germany and the USSR. If the US stayed out of it and they ended up in a stalemate, Hitler may have been willing to offer terms to Stalin. Stalin cared only for power and, if he thought he would exhaust his country fighting Germany, he might have accepted the terms: 1/2 of Poland, Finland, SW Asia, India, etc. Hitler would have been happy to offer Stalin the remnants of the British Empire. Once Hitler had regained his strength, thanks to France and Norway and others, he might well have turned once more to the USSR. Who knows.
 

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,673
Reaction score
2,904
Points
918
You know that Lend-Lease did not travel through there, right? It went basically from Seattle to Russia in the Pacific, and from New York across to England, or up and around to Russia.

They did not try to circumnavigate the globe and have to pass through two different war zones!

Control of the canal would have meant nothing. There was no huge German or Italian fleet to send to aid Japan, and Japan had no interest in helping out in Europe. The UK and US were sending any ships they wanted in other areas via other routes. Around Africa, or through the Panama Canal mostly. And all that oil would have helped Germany very little. Just as it helped the allies little. No way to really get it where it was needed.

And nothing between a German Egypt and Iran? Dude, go and look at a map sometimes, alright? Yes, nothing between them and Iran. Other than the entire Middle East, and some of the most inhospitable terrain in the world. As they had discovered in the First World War.

But as always, thanks again for posting. It is always a good laugh with how silly they are.
You're such a clueless dumbass it's embarrassing.



The Persian Corridor was a supply route through Iran into Soviet Azerbaijan by which British aid and American Lend-Lease supplies were transferred to the Soviet Union during World War II. Of the 17.5 million long tons of U.S. Lend-Lease aid provided to Russia, 7.9 million long tons (45%) were sent through Iran.[1]

....

This supply route originated in the US and UK with ships sailing around the Cape of Good Hope to the Persian Gulf. From there, the materiel transited Iran to the USSR.

''''

Statistics​

Of the 17.5 million long tons of U.S. Lend-Lease aid provided to Russia, 7.9 million long tons (45%) were sent through Iran.

....

Supplies came from as far away as Canada and the United States, and those were unloaded in Persian Gulf ports in Iran and Iraq. Once the Axis powers were cleared from the Mediterranean Sea in 1943 - with the Allied capture of Tunisia, Sicily, and southern Italy - cargo convoys were able to pass through the Mediterranean, the Suez Canal, and the Red Sea to Iran for shipment to the USSR.
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
Rommel lost in North Africa. People say he failed because he wasn't supported, but a good general would've taken the lack of support in count.

Then Rommel was given the job of fortifying the European coast against invasion. D-Day happened and the allies invaded. Rommel failed in that too.
1. he kicked ass-
a. however his supplies started to dry up
b. Montgomery had an edge with intel
even then, shithead Monty had a tough time against the Germans
c. in North Africa, usually, those with the logistics were on top
2. no he didn't fail on DDay--
a. Allies had overwhelming power--air and naval
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
Rommel lost in North Africa. People say he failed because he wasn't supported, but a good general would've taken the lack of support in count.

Then Rommel was given the job of fortifying the European coast against invasion. D-Day happened and the allies invaded. Rommel failed in that too.
1. also at El Alamein, he didn't have room for maneuver because of the Qattara Depression --which gave Monty Another advantage
a. defense is easier than offense
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
Rommel's reputation get's inflated because he is the guy Americans and British fought. And you can't have a good story without a challenging enemy.

A lot of the American and British authors who wrote books about WWII after the war, pumped Rommel up to make their books more exciting.

I think all the good generals were on the Eastern Front fighting the Soviets and we got the second string.

Rommel was a huge fan of Hitler in the beginning, but then Rommel was accused of an attempted assassination of Hitler and executed.
......wrong..he got all the way to Alamein after defeating the Brits in many battles and outsmarting them ..that's over 1000 miles
..for comparison, Normandy to Aachen is less than 400 miles
....see my initial post
....

1635016916294.png
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
Great point! The main reason the allies won the war!
no no---the Allies had OVERWHELMING/UNSTOPPABLE power.....the Germans got beat by the Russian numbers alone ....the war might have lasted longer without hitler's meddling, but not much
..and some German generals disobeyed his orders
just read this TODAY in Military History magazine page 30:
'''''...Hausser.....withdrew his forces to prevent encirclement .......in direct disobedience of hitler's orders''''''

...the outcome of the war was decided on 22 June 1941
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
Was Rommel all that...


Let's put it this way, be thankful Hitler was in charge and not Rommel, otherwise things would have been quite different...
see post # 28
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
I don't think I disagree with most of what you wrote except the separate peace between Germany and the USSR. If the US stayed out of it and they ended up in a stalemate, Hitler may have been willing to offer terms to Stalin. Stalin cared only for power and, if he thought he would exhaust his country fighting Germany, he might have accepted the terms: 1/2 of Poland, Finland, SW Asia, India, etc. Hitler would have been happy to offer Stalin the remnants of the British Empire. Once Hitler had regained his strength, thanks to France and Norway and others, he might well have turned once more to the USSR. Who knows.
Russia is NOT going to agree to any terms --Germany ATTACKED Russia--with a STAB in the BACK---JUST LIKE Japan did to the US
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
Hard to know what might have been if Hitler hadn't declared war on the US and the US stayed out of Europe. Hitler might have been able to strangle Britain eventually and they could not have retaken Europe. Brits might have held North Africa, maybe. Hitler could not have defeated the USSR so they may have signed a peace treaty and Hitler withdrew to their half of Poland. Hitler and Stalin could then have split Asia and Europe between them. Who knows.
as usual with ''what ifs''' like your post, they are ridiculous AND there are many ''what ifs' to counter your ''what ifs''
...Germany is not defeating Russia--too big --and a population more than twice of Germany
...I just went over this:
.....the longer Germany goes into Russia, it gets weaker EXPONENTIALLY
1. supply lines longer
a. more man power etc needed for those lines
2. the supplies needed are EXPONENTIALLY much greater
LOGISTICS!!!!!!! logistics were the KEY to battle = the war
..the outcome of the war was decided on 22 June 1941
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
15,514
Reaction score
2,744
Points
245
Location
Virginia
as usual with ''what ifs''' like your post, they are ridiculous AND there are many ''what ifs' to counter your ''what ifs''
...Germany is not defeating Russia--too big --and a population more than twice of Germany
...I just went over this:
.....the longer Germany goes into Russia, it gets weaker EXPONENTIALLY
1. supply lines longer
a. more man power etc needed for those lines
2. the supplies needed are EXPONENTIALLY much greater
LOGISTICS!!!!!!! logistics were the KEY to battle = the war
..the outcome of the war was decided on 22 June 1941
As I recall my history, the Germans were initially welcome as liberators by many who suffered under Stalin. Had it not been for their racism and brutality they might have gotten stronger as they 'liberated' more of Russia.
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
As I recall my history, the Germans were initially welcome as liberators by many who suffered under Stalin. Had it not been for their racism and brutality they might have gotten stronger as they 'liberated' more of Russia.
ok, so let's give the Germans some B1 bombers--!! = if if if if --there are counter ifs to all the ifs/etc
1. even if they had not been brutal/etc, that does not mean they could have SURELY '''liberated more of Russia''' etc etc etc
2. Stalin/the communist were VERY brutal BEFORE the war--still the country fought against the INVADERS
a. it's natural for domestic enemies to come together when foreigners attack
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
As I recall my history, the Germans were initially welcome as liberators by many who suffered under Stalin. Had it not been for their racism and brutality they might have gotten stronger as they 'liberated' more of Russia.
racism!! Russians and Germans are predominantly the same race
 
OP
Otis Mayfield

Otis Mayfield

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
2,258
Reaction score
2,181
Points
1,893
......wrong..he got all the way to Alamein after defeating the Brits in many battles and outsmarting them ..that's over 1000 miles
..for comparison, Normandy to Aachen is less than 400 miles
....see my initial post
....

View attachment 555495


Rommel lost North Africa and he lost the Normandy Invasion.

Great generals have one thing in common, they win a lot.
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
Rommel lost North Africa and he lost the Normandy Invasion.

Great generals have one thing in common, they win a lot.
yes, most of you know nothing about WW2/miltary/wars
....I've been over this before.....the Germans were fighting 2 of the Largest countries in the world ......MUCH more populated ..America ALONE had MORE war making potential than Germany, Russia, and Japan COMBINED:
1. = in short: it didn't matter WHAT general was in charge of North Africa or Normandy = they would've lost anyway
2. LOTS of Allied generals lost to the Germans and were RELIEVED--including ones that fought Rommel
3. Rommel won MANY battles in North Africa--far more than Monty/etc before the Us got involved
4. HAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
5. etc
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
43,851
Reaction score
19,844
Points
2,300
yes, most of you know nothing about WW2/miltary/wars
....I've been over this before.....the Germans were fighting 2 of the Largest countries in the world ......MUCH more populated ..America ALONE had MORE war making potential than Germany, Russia, and Japan COMBINED:
1. = in short: it didn't matter WHAT general was in charge of North Africa or Normandy = they would've lost anyway
2. LOTS of Allied generals lost to the Germans and were RELIEVED--including ones that fought Rommel
3. Rommel won MANY battles in North Africa--far more than Monty/etc before the Us got involved
4. HAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
5. etc
and that American war making potential was BEFORE the war industry started kicking in!!!
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
15,514
Reaction score
2,744
Points
245
Location
Virginia
racism!! Russians and Germans are predominantly the same race
Too bad you weren't there to tell that to Hitler, he considered Slavs to be inferior to Aryans.
 

Mushroom

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
1,739
Reaction score
576
Points
198
Location
Near Baghdad By The Bay, California
You're such a clueless dumbass it's embarrassing.

At least I know that it did not open until the fall of 1943. Once the Med had been cleared, the Africa Campaign won, and most of the Italian and German navies in the region destroyed. By that time, the shipments of supplies were nowhere near as critical as they had been earlier in the war. The Axis powers were being pushed back on all fronts, and the Soviet War Machine had itself just started to reach it's full potential. Not like back when it first started.

The difference is, I understand the differences here. And can place it in the context of when and where we are talking about.

Literally, you are talking about a late war shortcut. Where ass before all shipments sent around Africa because of Germany and Italy in the Med. If they had no been so thoroughly defeated, there never would have been a "Persian" route.
 

Dayton3

Gold Member
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
1,287
Reaction score
467
Points
198
Rommel lost in North Africa. People say he failed because he wasn't supported, but a good general would've taken the lack of support in count.

Then Rommel was given the job of fortifying the European coast against invasion. D-Day happened and the allies invaded. Rommel failed in that too.
Even great generals fail and are repeatedly defeated. You have to look at the totality of their service and the circumstances.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$95.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top