Quote from: Blauritter on October 05, 2013, 02:26:06 PM
The worst miscalculation for the USA was to get involved in the war in Europe to start with ,unless the deaths of tens of thousands of us servicemen mean so little.

Japan made war on the US on December 7, 1941. Adolf Hitler, whose government was one of the parties to the Tripartite Pact, which bound Japan, Germany, and Italy together, declared war on the United States on December 10, 1941. Prior to that, Hitler had ordered his navy to sink US ships wherever and whenever found -- U-boats were slamming torpedoes into US flagged merchant vessels literally within sight of the East Coast.

Please explain what you mean by "miscalculation."

Quote from: TboneAgain on October 05, 2013, 02:53:28 PM
Japan made war on the US on December 7, 1941. Adolf Hitler, whose government was one of the parties to the Tripartite Pact, which bound Japan, Germany, and Italy together, declared war on the United States on December 10, 1941. Prior to that, Hitler had ordered his navy to sink US ships wherever and whenever found -- U-boats were slamming torpedoes into US flagged merchant vessels literally within sight of the East Coast.

Please explain what you mean by "miscalculation."

by miscalculation I mean involvement in a European conflict could've been averted.

The basic stuff found on wikepedia about the tripartite pact and pearl harbor and dec 10  and so on  ; rings a lot like the Gulf of  Tonkin resolution , the sinking of the Maine by the Spanish , and WMDS in IRAQ!!!

pure sophistry!! oh and I think it was FDR that order all german ships sunk even luxury liners ; right after LEND LEASE went into effect!

Quote from: TboneAgain on October 05, 2013, 02:53:28 PM
Japan made war on the US on December 7, 1941. Adolf Hitler, whose government was one of the parties to the Tripartite Pact, which bound Japan, Germany, and Italy together, declared war on the United States on December 10, 1941. Prior to that, Hitler had ordered his navy to sink US ships wherever and whenever found -- U-boats were slamming torpedoes into US flagged merchant vessels literally within sight of the East Coast.

Please explain what you mean by "miscalculation."

American involvement in war with Germany was preceded by a long series of steps, not one of which could reasonably be represented as conducive to the achievement of the President's professed ideal of keeping the United States out of foreign wars. The more important of these steps may be briefly listed as follows:

1.The exchange of American destroyers for British bases in the Caribbean and in Newfoundland in September, 1940. This was a clear departure from the requirements of neutrality and was also a violation of some specific American laws. Indeed, a conference of top government lawyers at the time decided that the destroyer deal put this country into the war, legally and morally.
2.The enactment of the Lend-Lease Act in March, 1941. In complete contradiction of the wording and intent of the Neutrality Act, which remained on the statute books, this made the United States an unlimited partner in the economic war against the Axis Powers all over the world.
3.The secret American-British staff talks in Washington in January-March, 1941. Extraordinary care was taken to conceal not only the contents of these talks but the very fact that they were taking place from the knowledge of Congress. At the time when administration spokesmen were offering assurances that there were no warlike implications in the Lend-Lease Act, this staff conference used the revealing phrase, "when the United States becomes involved in war with Germany."
4.The inauguration of so-called naval patrols, the purpose of which was to report the presence of German submarines to British warships, in the Atlantic in April, 1941.
5.The dispatch of American laborers to Northern Ireland to build a naval base, obviously with the needs of an American expeditionary force in mind.
6.The occupation of Iceland by American troops in July, 1941. This was going rather far afield for a government which professed as its main concern the keeping of the United States out of foreign wars.
7.The Atlantic Conference of Roosevelt and Churchill, August 9-12, 1941. Besides committing America as a partner in a virtual declaration of war aims, this conference considered the presentation of an ultimatum to Japan and the occupation of the Cape Verde Islands, a Portuguese possession, by United States troops.
8.The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German submarines, formally announced on September 11. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl Harbor.

Quote from: Blauritter on October 05, 2013, 03:15:37 PM
American involvement in war with Germany was preceded by a long series of steps, not one of which could reasonably be represented as conducive to the achievement of the President's professed ideal of keeping the United States out of foreign wars. The more important of these steps may be briefly listed as follows:
1.The exchange of American destroyers for British bases in the Caribbean and in Newfoundland in September, 1940. This was a clear departure from the requirements of neutrality and was also a violation of some specific American laws. Indeed, a conference of top government lawyers at the time decided that the destroyer deal put this country into the war, legally and morally.

And with a war going on in Europe, the US wouldn't have any interest in advance Bases ON OUR SIDE OF THE OCEAN?

Quote2.The enactment of the Lend-Lease Act in March, 1941. In complete contradiction of the wording and intent of the Neutrality Act, which remained on the statute books, this made the United States an unlimited partner in the economic war against the Axis Powers all over the world.

I can understand how some neo Nazis might be irritated that the United States looked at the situation in Europe and decided it would be better for the US if the Nazis lost. The Axis powers had years of aggression to look back on. Why should the US assume they would just stop at Europe?

Quote3.The secret American-British staff talks in Washington in January-March, 1941. Extraordinary care was taken to conceal not only the contents of these talks but the very fact that they were taking place from the knowledge of Congress. At the time when administration spokesmen were offering assurances that there were no warlike implications in the Lend-Lease Act, this staff conference used the revealing phrase, "when the United States becomes involved in war with Germany."

That still doesn't change the fact that Hitler declared war on the US; in the end proving just as mindlessly aggressive as the US had feared. It should also be pointed out that there were ties between the US and Great Britain going back to the Monroe Doctrine.

Quote4.The inauguration of so-called naval patrols, the purpose of which was to report the presence of German submarines to British warships, in the Atlantic in April, 1941.

And Nazi Germany felt they had a right to have hostile armed warships off the coast of the United States because?

Quote5.The dispatch of American laborers to Northern Ireland to build a naval base, obviously with the needs of an American expeditionary force in mind.

So what? Those bases were manned by British ships and planes originally.Are you claiming that the US had no right to conduct commerce with Great Britain?

Quote6.The occupation of Iceland by American troops in July, 1941. This was going rather far afield for a government which professed as its main concern the keeping of the United States out of foreign wars.

Considering that Iceland was a Danish possession, and that Denmark had been attacked and occupied by Germany, it's obvious that the US might have a vested interest in not allowing the Germans to occupy a base so close to the US.

Quote7.The Atlantic Conference of Roosevelt and Churchill, August 9-12, 1941. Besides committing America as a partner in a virtual declaration of war aims, this conference considered the presentation of an ultimatum to Japan and the occupation of the Cape Verde Islands, a Portuguese possession, by United States troops.

It seems that you're laboring under the delusion that the US should take no steps, to prepare itself in case a war that had already been ongoing for two years already, drew us in.

Quote8.The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German submarines, formally announced on September 11. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl Harbor.

Why don't we start the war from the moment U-652 fired on the USN Greer, which is the genesis of FDR's shot on sight order.

Quote from: Blauritter on October 05, 2013, 03:15:37 PM
American involvement in war with Germany was preceded by a long series of steps, not one of which could reasonably be represented as conducive to the achievement of the President's professed ideal of keeping the United States out of foreign wars. The more important of these steps may be briefly listed as follows:

1.The exchange of American destroyers for British bases in the Caribbean and in Newfoundland in September, 1940. This was a clear departure from the requirements of neutrality and was also a violation of some specific American laws. Indeed, a conference of top government lawyers at the time decided that the destroyer deal put this country into the war, legally and morally.
2.The enactment of the Lend-Lease Act in March, 1941. In complete contradiction of the wording and intent of the Neutrality Act, which remained on the statute books, this made the United States an unlimited partner in the economic war against the Axis Powers all over the world.
3.The secret American-British staff talks in Washington in January-March, 1941. Extraordinary care was taken to conceal not only the contents of these talks but the very fact that they were taking place from the knowledge of Congress. At the time when administration spokesmen were offering assurances that there were no warlike implications in the Lend-Lease Act, this staff conference used the revealing phrase, "when the United States becomes involved in war with Germany."
4.The inauguration of so-called naval patrols, the purpose of which was to report the presence of German submarines to British warships, in the Atlantic in April, 1941.
5.The dispatch of American laborers to Northern Ireland to build a naval base, obviously with the needs of an American expeditionary force in mind.
6.The occupation of Iceland by American troops in July, 1941. This was going rather far afield for a government which professed as its main concern the keeping of the United States out of foreign wars.
7.The Atlantic Conference of Roosevelt and Churchill, August 9-12, 1941. Besides committing America as a partner in a virtual declaration of war aims, this conference considered the presentation of an ultimatum to Japan and the occupation of the Cape Verde Islands, a Portuguese possession, by United States troops.
8.The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German submarines, formally announced on September 11. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl Harbor.

Um, this is a copy/paste job. Would you be kind enough to credit your source? Thanks.

"That still doesn't change the fact that Hitler declared war on the US; in the end proving just as mindlessly aggressive as the US had feared. It should also be pointed out that there were ties between the US and Great Britain going back to the Monroe Doctrine."

War was in play long before any  declaration was made. Was Lend lease an act of neutrality?
Was Germany entitled to maybe have its own  MONROE DOCTRINE . or was that only a [perogative of American foreign policy allowing for the great westward expansion and the genocide of indigenous  tribes .? Selfrighteous is no way to read history.

Most definitely Stalingrad. Hitlers Army was all but depleted.

Quote from: PatriotGuard on October 07, 2013, 02:27:32 PM
Most definitely Stalingrad. Hitlers Army was all but depleted.

A lot of historians think it was Hitler's order to change the plan and to split his forces that did in the German Army.  Originally the plan was to secure the Caucus oil fields and shore up its flanks before advancing.  But Hitler accelerated the campaign, and ordered the siege of Stalingrad take place at the same time. 

Even with the German forces split, Stalingrad's defenders were at one point down to a toehold.   If the Germans had hit in full force, the city would probably have been taken fairly quickly.

that's not entirely true. The impression was made by the OKW  that Stalingrad could be taken without heavy armour . The order by Hitler  to send panzers to take Moscow was a concession to OKW . It wasn't his idea. He didn't want to take Moscow ,it made little sense to try it.
If Leningrad was left untaken due to scarcity in manpower  ,why expend scarce personnel on  moscow. The soviets wouldn't have surrendered in any event.

It  had little strategic value ,even as a communication center ,since soviet forces were already in disarray. and had little cohesion from moscow or anywhere else.
get real!!

Quote from: Blauritter on October 07, 2013, 03:44:21 PM
that's not entirely true. The impression was made by the OKW  that Stalingrad could be taken without heavy armour . The order by Hitler  to send panzers to take Moscow was a concession to OKW . It wasn't his idea. He didn't want to take Moscow ,it made little sense to try it.
If Leningrad was left untaken due to scarcity in manpower  ,why expend scarce personnel on  moscow. The soviets wouldn't have surrendered in any event.

It  had little strategic value ,even as a communication center ,since soviet forces were already in disarray. and had little cohesion from moscow or anywhere else.
get real!!

Is it my imagination, or are you now making excuses for Hitler. The fact of the matter is that the Wehrmacht was a horse drawn army. You can see where that might present a problem in the vastness of Russia. If the Germans had mechanized their armies before they entered Russia they might have one. But this takes us back to the old saying: "Amateurs talk about strategy and tactics, professionals talk about logistics". Both in the First and Second World War, the Germans showed themselves to be amateurs.

Quote from: mdgiles on October 08, 2013, 07:29:31 AM
Is it my imagination, or are you now making excuses for Hitler. The fact of the matter is that the Wehrmacht was a horse drawn army. You can see where that might present a problem in the vastness of Russia. If the Germans had mechanized their armies before they entered Russia they might have one. But this takes us back to the old saying: "Amateurs talk about strategy and tactics, professionals talk about logistics". Both in the First and Second World War, the Germans showed themselves to be amateurs.

The GERMANS were (and are) extraordinarily proficient at strategy, tactics and logistics.  The Kaiser and Hitler were both hopelessly inept at all three of those things.  But their generals were very, very good at their jobs.

I once heard that up to 90 percent of German supplies were delivered by horse and wagon during WW2.  Germany had only a very few fully-mechanized divisions; however, when properly applied they were amazingly effective.  There is every reason to believe that Operation Barbarossa could have accomplished its objectives if Hitler hadn't overruled his generals.  In doing so, he made two major mistakes:

1)  He changed the Case Blue operational plan for southern Russia because it was going too smoothly; and

2)  He neglected a primary requirement of any siege:  to mass sufficient mobile forces to outflank the city and preclude re-enforcement and counterattack.

Like everything else Blaupunk has ever said, the notion that Hitler's supreme command talked him into this is not only historically inaccurate but also patently asinine.  There was a REASON Hitler's own generals tried to assassinate him, and it was most definitely not because he was too gosh-darned malleable to their suggestions.

Quote from: mdgiles on October 08, 2013, 07:29:31 AM
Is it my imagination, or are you now making excuses for Hitler. The fact of the matter is that the Wehrmacht was a horse drawn army. You can see where that might present a problem in the vastness of Russia. If the Germans had mechanized their armies before they entered Russia they might have one. But this takes us back to the old saying: "Amateurs talk about strategy and tactics, professionals talk about logistics". Both in the First and Second World War, the Germans showed themselves to be amateurs.

it's not your imagination ,it's your lack of knowledge about the war in the east.
You need to separate fact from contrived myth.   the wehrmacht could've been better prepared for the vastness of the russian steppes but in war you can't always predict the future.

They were far better mechanized than the soviets and  far better trained .

Germans  lacked  the manpower to continue as well as the petrol and other resources. Lend lease was also extended to soviets lest you forget, But nice try..

I'm not making excuses for anyone. Hitler played his cards in logical sequence but as any poker player will tell you you can play each card logically and you can still lose the hand. Hitler was a gambler.

Quote from: Blauritter on October 05, 2013, 03:15:37 PM
American involvement in war with Germany was preceded by a long series of steps, not one of which could reasonably be represented as conducive to the achievement of the President's professed ideal of keeping the United States out of foreign wars. The more important of these steps may be briefly listed as follows:

1.The exchange of American destroyers for British bases in the Caribbean and in Newfoundland in September, 1940. This was a clear departure from the requirements of neutrality and was also a violation of some specific American laws. Indeed, a conference of top government lawyers at the time decided that the destroyer deal put this country into the war, legally and morally.
2.The enactment of the Lend-Lease Act in March, 1941. In complete contradiction of the wording and intent of the Neutrality Act, which remained on the statute books, this made the United States an unlimited partner in the economic war against the Axis Powers all over the world.
3.The secret American-British staff talks in Washington in January-March, 1941. Extraordinary care was taken to conceal not only the contents of these talks but the very fact that they were taking place from the knowledge of Congress. At the time when administration spokesmen were offering assurances that there were no warlike implications in the Lend-Lease Act, this staff conference used the revealing phrase, "when the United States becomes involved in war with Germany."
4.The inauguration of so-called naval patrols, the purpose of which was to report the presence of German submarines to British warships, in the Atlantic in April, 1941.
5.The dispatch of American laborers to Northern Ireland to build a naval base, obviously with the needs of an American expeditionary force in mind.
6.The occupation of Iceland by American troops in July, 1941. This was going rather far afield for a government which professed as its main concern the keeping of the United States out of foreign wars.
7.The Atlantic Conference of Roosevelt and Churchill, August 9-12, 1941. Besides committing America as a partner in a virtual declaration of war aims, this conference considered the presentation of an ultimatum to Japan and the occupation of the Cape Verde Islands, a Portuguese possession, by United States troops.
8.The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German submarines, formally announced on September 11. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl Harbor.

Please do us the kindness of quoting the source of this obvious copy/paste job. You'll note that this is the second time I've asked you to do so. Thanks.

Quote from: TboneAgain on October 08, 2013, 06:02:43 PM
Please do us the kindness of quoting the source of this obvious copy/paste job. You'll note that this is the second time I've asked you to do so. Thanks.

It has to be a copy and paste job as the punctuations are in the right place. 

Solar gave him the

Quote from: TboneAgain on October 08, 2013, 06:02:43 PM
Please do us the kindness of quoting the source of this obvious copy/paste job. You'll note that this is the second time I've asked you to do so. Thanks.

Interesting note, google ranked us first under the original source.

https://www.google.com/#q=3.The+secret+American-British+staff+talks+in+Washington+in+January-March%2C+1941.+Extraordinary+care+was+taken+to+conceal+not+only+the+contents+of+these+talks+but+the+very+fact+that+they+were+taking+place+from+the+knowledge+of+Congress.+At+the+time+when+administration+spokesmen+were+offering+assurances+that+there+were+no+warlike+implications+in+the+Lend-Lease+Act%2C+this+staff+conference+used+the+revealing+phrase%2C+%22when+the+United+States+becomes+involved+in+war+with+Germany.%22+4.The+inauguration+of+so-called+naval+patrols%2C+the+purpose+of+which+was+to+report+the+presence+of+German+submarines+to+British+warships%2C+in+the+Atlantic+in+April%2C+1941.+