Without the US, the French (& British) would be speaking German

Lord Fairfax

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
3,518
Space Bat Lair
Whatever for? No country fought the Germans as frequently in the 19th and 20th c. as the Danes. They were even happy to forego the 19th c. distinction of being "Germanic", preferring to rather be "Celts", as long as they didn't have to confess to kinship with the sodding Germans. They are unlikely to be happy with this high-handed treatment. ;)
Fair point.
I was trying give our Hungarian friend the benefit of the doubt.

The only Dane on the list IIRC was Neils Bohr, who played a critical role in Britain's Tube Alloy project
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Poly

Ad Honorem
Apr 2011
6,866
Georgia, USA
Fair point.
I was trying give our Hungarian friend the benefit of the doubt.

The only Dane on the list IIRC was Neils Bohr, who played a critical role in Britain's Tube Alloy project
Sorry, are you saying this Danish physicist was the only Dane to work for the allies and that none worked for the Nazis ?
 

Lord Fairfax

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
3,518
Space Bat Lair
Sorry, are you saying this Danish physicist was the only Dane to work for the allies and that none worked for the Nazis ?
No, this was in response to the OP's rather facile claim that Nazi/Axis success was a reflection of all their Nobel laureates in the sciences, I was just bursting his bubble.
Many of the German/Austrian Nobel winners were Jewish, and consequently fled after Hitler came to power.

I'm sure that there were a number of other Danish scientists who helped the Nazis, but Bohr was most prominent as a Nobel physicist, and he ended up on the British side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Lord Fairfax

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
3,518
Space Bat Lair
Sorry, are you saying this Danish physicist was the only Dane to work for the allies and that none worked for the Nazis ?
In case you missed it (I think Naomasa announced it on another thread) the OP "Ironcomber" was a zombie account reincarnation of previously banned member "JanossyJanos", who had an obsessive dislike of us (dim-witted) Brits, there were quite a few threads about how much better German science and engineering was, etc etc
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,847
Europix
No

Japan would have lost the Pacific War one-on-one with the USA (it almost was anyway) but it is not obvious that Germany loses a single front war with the USSR.

Take away allied material support to the USSR and it is significantly weaker.

Take away the allied war effort in the West and Nazi Germany is much stronger in the East.
No. But yes.

I said : "... even if it would have faced URSS only ...". Facing isn't the same as the one-to-one war.

As for the rest, I think that just looking at the raw figures of German loses in the Battle for Britain and in the Battle for Stalingrad, more specifically at the loses and at the rate of replacement of loses (human as material), it becomes evident that in each of two, comparing the initial moment with the last one, Germany was falling (=loosing), while UK, respectively URSS, were rising (=winning).

And a small precision on Lend-Lease: there's the generalized misinterpretation, misunderstanding when not simply ignorance that it involved only US. No. URSS (as other) received a lot from UK.

The other precision needed on it is that the Lend-Lease went on "full regime" in 1943-1944.

As I said, by that time, Germany (long) lost its aerial supremacy to UK and it's terrestrial one to URSS.

Germany would have won the war only in one scenario: UK or URSS signing a peace treaty with Germany after 22 Juni 1941. Personally, I find that "if" totally unrealistic.
 
Last edited:

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,847
Europix
Well clearly the Germans didn't recruit from woman, the elderly, the sick and children.

How many is that now ?

I understand that it is an embarrassment for such a small country to have 13,000 men volunteer to join the Nazis.
It isn't an embarrassment for such a small country: it's an embarrassment for all European countries. I don't think we could find a single European country that didn't "furnished" Nazi volunteers.

It's "embarrassing" (the word it's too weak for me) for the human kind, regardless numbers or nationality.
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
14,312
Are we to understand the OP as the fact that the US is keeping the language skills of the UK and France down... And without US meddling, the citizens of those countries would be fluent in german (in addition to any other languages they may speak) ?
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
14,312
It is right at 50 %.Without USA we would be speaking Rusian….
Considering that it is hard to find english speakers in France, I very much doubt the ability of the french education system to deliver large numbers of russian speaking citizens.....
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
14,312
Soviets had laughable sized industry to wage successful war, however the Germans did not care to transform their 4X 5X bigger industrial potential into a war economy thus they lost the war. It was more important for the nazis to keep the living standard on pre war level until they lost the war.
what is it that this alleged available industrial capacity would have produced that would have made Germany win the war ?
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
6,116
Well the British Free Corps of the SS was much smaller.
The UK wasn't an occupied nation. The Nazis didn't ask for volunteers to fight for Germany, but against the USSR.

Context matters, but you're sticking to making WWII into a facile Morality Play instead. Feels good?