america

[muy_thaiguy]

How the f*ck did American ships get past Japanese-German blockades? Russia's valuable land was being taken over. What was it supposed to do? It needed help. All of the other nations bordering Germany had been screwed over. Heavy losses from attacking Finland. If the US weren't worlds away from Germany do think our homeland wouldn't have been overran by German armies?

It's called Alaska, and the German navy was weak to begin with, and what U-boats they had where in the North Atlantic. The Japanese Navy was busy with the US Navy. And this is where America's Industry comes into play. By making thousands of merchant/trade vessels for both Pacific and Atlantic fronts. THe Japanese last major offensive in the North Pacific was the Battle of Midway, where they lost most of their Aircraft carriers and their best Admiral. Thus allowing for US ships to get supplies to Russia. Your ignorance on the subject astounds me to no ends.

Are you a fucking idiot? Ever heard of the Graff Spree or the Great American Turkey Shoot? It was made by a German admiral who sent German ships all around the Americas sinking American merchant and war vessels. When we entered the war, German vessels were all over the Goddamn place sinking ships, but we were able to overpower them (war effort).

We couldn't overwhelm the Germans if we bordered them because of something (oh I don't know) BLITZKRIEG!!!

The Blitzkrieg was only effective on land, hence why Russia was losing horribly. The German Navy was small to begin with. And their flagship was sunk, thus ending most of their sea power except for the U-Boats. And like I said, the US produced thousands of ships to bring supplies to both sides, and I guess I should have been more clear, but they also used an escort system, where warships would suround the transport ships that were in the middle, thus protecting them from many attacks from U-boats. Learn the whole damn story, not just what you want to hear.

[Chris7He]

Actually, Russia was being crushed and pushed back by the Nazi troops. Not to mention the US had to supply Russia with massive amounts of supplies and materials, which Russia sorely needed. Not to mention if the US and Australia hadn't been going all out on Japan, Russia would have been crushed from 2 fronts instead of one. It was because of this that Russia was able to shift it's armies from the East to the West and beat finally halt the Nazis with sheer numbers, but even then, hundreds of thousands were killed.

Capitalist bullshit...

Russia was forcing the Germans back with sheer numbers. For every T-34 (outclassed by the Tiger) they destroyed seven popped up. The Germans attempted three simultaneous assaults that split up their armies and Russia was able to deal with one of them at a time. Japan didn't touch Russia because they were too busy fighting the US... that's true, but the Russian frequently raided Manchuria.

Russia prevented disaster at Kursk and other areas. They were the first to employ female soldiers without discrimination and turned the tide. If not for Russia's involvement, Germany could have used over six thousand tanks and six million soldiers against the forces in Normandy and I'm sure that our forces could've defeated them...

Russia didn't develop the T-34 for awhile, and before that, the seasoned veterans of the Nazi troops were simply destroying everything that the Russians could throw at them. And would you care to enlightrn me on what is wrong with what I stated? That Russia was taking massive casualties? That the US supplied Russia with sorely needed materials and supplies? What?

-First women in the army: Yugoslav partisans, from April 1941.
-Hitler didn't win in his campaign in Russia because he was not a military genius. He took a byte that was just too big to swallow.
1. He couldn't maintain his lines and he had tremendous casualties behind his lines, where partisan guerrilla attacked his troops while resting.
2. He didn't have enough gasoline for his panzers.
3. Early winter prevented him from advancing faster and tanks and airplanes weren't designed for fighting on snow, mud north wind and fog (airplanes couldn't fly). 4. Russians had more manpower to just throw into every battle. Often two soldiers were given only one rifle.
5. American Aid to USSR was more and aid in medications, food and jeeps. Tanks and B-52's were sent to, but not in great numbers. Till the end of the 1944. convoys to USSR were a tricky business because Germans controlled North Sea (from Norway) and Japan controlled eastern seas. Not that many convoys made it through, and most of this help was more a gesture of good will than effective aid that really made the difference and turned the course of war to the side of the USSR.

I meant women in the official army in mass numbers. They were actually put in their own divisions and flying squadrons. The US didn't supply that much support to Russia. Russian supplies were low after the Germans took over many strategic areas, but Russia sent death squads to try to make Germans waste ammunition and eventually overwhelmed Germany who began sending young men and eventually twelve year olds to fight for them.

Unfortunately, during the Russian occupation rapes occurred so often in Berlin that 80 percent of women in Berlin had a venereal disease.

[Tyr]

blitzkrieg is only effective on relatively small , level areas the point is to overwhelm them before the enemy could react with mountains and huge land areas it would be diffuclt with a country like germany to invade our country. it only wokred on russia because of how backward and sparsly populated it was at tthe time

[Chris7He]

The Blitzkrieg was only effective on land, hence why Russia was losing horribly. The German Navy was small to begin with. And their flagship was sunk, thus ending most of their sea power except for the U-Boats. And like I said, the US produced thousands of ships to bring supplies to both sides, and I guess I should have been more clear, but they also used an escort system, where warships would suround the transport ships that were in the middle, thus protecting them from many attacks from U-boats. Learn the whole damn story, not just what you want to hear.

Russia was losing a lot of land because it was trying the tactics that we used in World War I to try to balance things out. Germany dealt out damaging blows and heavy casualties, but because of partisans and the Russians digging in deep in the winter, the Germans were steadily losing.

[Tyr]

i dont know how many times its been said but general winter won the war in russia not the russians

[ignotus]

blitzkrieg is only effective on relatively small , level areas the point is to overwhelm them before the enemy could react with mountains and huge land areas it would be diffuclt with a country like germany to invade our country. it only wokred on russia because of how backward and sparsly populated it was at tthe time

I think Blitzkrieg practice proved that it worked better when it's applied on developed countries. I got a few examples:

In 1940. France got great and maintained roads, bridges and airfields. And Germany took advantage of that for going faster into enemy territory so they could surround British expeditionary force at Dunkirk. And german panzers & trucks could re-fuel at any gas station in France (and they did).

Attack on USSR started as a Blitzkrieg but it soon failed because roads were bad, there were no bridges (at least stable so heavy panzers can go over them). Airfields and bridges were built from scratch that slowed Germans down. And gas stations? There weren't any.

[Tyr]

good points

i thinkit would work in a limited combat area where airborne troops could surround enemies and tanks and aircraft could use firepower to beat the enemy into dust

[ignotus]

i dont know how many times its been said but general winter won the war in russia not the russians

so germans just went home over winter? Please, German soldiers were fanatically devoted. They didn't like winter. They were not equipped for winter war and they could not rely on their airplanes and panzers so much, that's true. But winter only slowed them down (and moral fell a bit if you wanna bring that).
But winter didn't fire bullets at German soldiers.

[dustn64]

Hmm...

[muy_thaiguy]

Actually, Russia was being crushed and pushed back by the Nazi troops. Not to mention the US had to supply Russia with massive amounts of supplies and materials, which Russia sorely needed. Not to mention if the US and Australia hadn't been going all out on Japan, Russia would have been crushed from 2 fronts instead of one. It was because of this that Russia was able to shift it's armies from the East to the West and beat finally halt the Nazis with sheer numbers, but even then, hundreds of thousands were killed.

Capitalist bullshit...

Russia was forcing the Germans back with sheer numbers. For every T-34 (outclassed by the Tiger) they destroyed seven popped up. The Germans attempted three simultaneous assaults that split up their armies and Russia was able to deal with one of them at a time. Japan didn't touch Russia because they were too busy fighting the US... that's true, but the Russian frequently raided Manchuria.

Russia prevented disaster at Kursk and other areas. They were the first to employ female soldiers without discrimination and turned the tide. If not for Russia's involvement, Germany could have used over six thousand tanks and six million soldiers against the forces in Normandy and I'm sure that our forces could've defeated them...

Russia didn't develop the T-34 for awhile, and before that, the seasoned veterans of the Nazi troops were simply destroying everything that the Russians could throw at them. And would you care to enlightrn me on what is wrong with what I stated? That Russia was taking massive casualties? That the US supplied Russia with sorely needed materials and supplies? What?

-First women in the army: Yugoslav partisans, from April 1941.
-Hitler didn't win in his campaign in Russia because he was not a military genius. He took a byte that was just too big to swallow.
1. He couldn't maintain his lines and he had tremendous casualties behind his lines, where partisan guerrilla attacked his troops while resting.
2. He didn't have enough gasoline for his panzers.
3. Early winter prevented him from advancing faster and tanks and airplanes weren't designed for fighting on snow, mud north wind and fog (airplanes couldn't fly). 4. Russians had more manpower to just throw into every battle. Often two soldiers were given only one rifle.
5. American Aid to USSR was more and aid in medications, food and jeeps. Tanks and B-52's were sent to, but not in great numbers. Till the end of the 1944. convoys to USSR were a tricky business because Germans controlled North Sea (from Norway) and Japan controlled eastern seas. Not that many convoys made it through, and most of this help was more a gesture of good will than effective aid that really made the difference and turned the course of war to the side of the USSR.

1. He did have tremoundous casualties, but his troops inflicted far more on the Russians.
2. He did have some, the problem was that it was the worst kind of blend for the harsh Russian winter, turning the gas into gel.
3. 2 explains it
4. Yes, I know, they drafted thousands upon thousands of people, many of which didn't even have a fire arm.
5. I have already pointed out that the Germans controlled that area, and that the Japanese were busy (quite a bit, especially later on in the war, when their Navy was rendered useless due to lack of fuel) with the US and Australia.
Also, I have never said Hitler was a military genius, but he had some fairly good commanders working for him. Hitler was the blunder in Russia, because he refused to allow his troops to evacuate Stalingrad, which was what hurt him the most in the Eastern Front. Also, the supplies shipped by the US were indeed needed by the Russians and other Allies.

[ignotus]

good points

i thinkit would work in a limited combat area where airborne troops could surround enemies and tanks and aircraft could use firepower to beat the enemy into dust

Airborne troops were used as an infantry in German attacks on France and Russia. They became really "airborne" only by the end of the war.

Blitzkrieg wasn't performed in a "limited combat area". It was a full scale attack (do it quickly before enemy can re-group and counterattack).

Motorized infantry and panzers were used for this quick attack which in fact was some sort of avoiding-attack. French troops were surrounded and most of them didn't even fight the Germans.

[Bigfalcon65]

Actually, Russia was being crushed and pushed back by the Nazi troops. Not to mention the US had to supply Russia with massive amounts of supplies and materials, which Russia sorely needed. Not to mention if the US and Australia hadn't been going all out on Japan, Russia would have been crushed from 2 fronts instead of one. It was because of this that Russia was able to shift it's armies from the East to the West and beat finally halt the Nazis with sheer numbers, but even then, hundreds of thousands were killed.

Capitalist bullshit...

Russia was forcing the Germans back with sheer numbers. For every T-34 (outclassed by the Tiger) they destroyed seven popped up. The Germans attempted three simultaneous assaults that split up their armies and Russia was able to deal with one of them at a time. Japan didn't touch Russia because they were too busy fighting the US... that's true, but the Russian frequently raided Manchuria.

Russia prevented disaster at Kursk and other areas. They were the first to employ female soldiers without discrimination and turned the tide. If not for Russia's involvement, Germany could have used over six thousand tanks and six million soldiers against the forces in Normandy and I'm sure that our forces could've defeated them...

Russia didn't develop the T-34 for awhile, and before that, the seasoned veterans of the Nazi troops were simply destroying everything that the Russians could throw at them. And would you care to enlightrn me on what is wrong with what I stated? That Russia was taking massive casualties? That the US supplied Russia with sorely needed materials and supplies? What?

-First women in the army: Yugoslav partisans, from April 1941.
-Hitler didn't win in his campaign in Russia because he was not a military genius. He took a byte that was just too big to swallow.
1. He couldn't maintain his lines and he had tremendous casualties behind his lines, where partisan guerrilla attacked his troops while resting.
2. He didn't have enough gasoline for his panzers.
3. Early winter prevented him from advancing faster and tanks and airplanes weren't designed for fighting on snow, mud north wind and fog (airplanes couldn't fly). 4. Russians had more manpower to just throw into every battle. Often two soldiers were given only one rifle.
5. American Aid to USSR was more and aid in medications, food and jeeps. Tanks and B-52's were sent to, but not in great numbers. Till the end of the 1944. convoys to USSR were a tricky business because Germans controlled North Sea (from Norway) and Japan controlled eastern seas. Not that many convoys made it through, and most of this help was more a gesture of good will than effective aid that really made the difference and turned the course of war to the side of the USSR.

1. He did have tremoundous casualties, but his troops inflicted far more on the Russians.
2. He did have some, the problem was that it was the worst kind of blend for the harsh Russian winter, turning the gas into gel.
3. 2 explains it
4. Yes, I know, they drafted thousands upon thousands of people, many of which didn't even have a fire arm.
5. I have already pointed out that the Germans controlled that area, and that the Japanese were busy (quite a bit, especially later on in the war, when their Navy was rendered useless due to lack of fuel) with the US and Australia.
Also, I have never said Hitler was a military genius, but he had some fairly good commanders working for him. Hitler was the blunder in Russia, because he refused to allow his troops to evacuate Stalingrad, which was what hurt him the most in the Eastern Front. Also, the supplies shipped by the US were indeed needed by the Russians and other Allies.

the germans failed for the same reason the french did, way too amny people to fight jsut like china, and a very very hasrh environment to which they were not prepared, those 2 made russia impossible to take over.

[Bigfalcon65]

good points

i thinkit would work in a limited combat area where airborne troops could surround enemies and tanks and aircraft could use firepower to beat the enemy into dust

Airborne troops were used as an infantry in German attacks on France and Russia. They became really "airborne" only by the end of the war.

Blitzkrieg wasn't performed in a "limited combat area". It was a full scale attack (do it quickly before enemy can re-group and counterattack).

Motorized infantry and panzers were used for this quick attack which in fact was some sort of avoiding-attack. French troops were surrounded and most of them didn't even fight the Germans.

yes, germany sent all their tanks and planes first, then followed by infantry, countires lasted a few weeks before they fell

[Chris7He]

blitzkrieg is only effective on relatively small , level areas the point is to overwhelm them before the enemy could react with mountains and huge land areas it would be diffuclt with a country like germany to invade our country. it only wokred on russia because of how backward and sparsly populated it was at tthe time

I think Blitzkrieg practice proved that it worked better when it's applied on developed countries. I got a few examples:

In 1940. France got great and maintained roads, bridges and airfields. And Germany took advantage of that for going faster into enemy territory so they could surround British expeditionary force at Dunkirk. And german panzers & trucks could re-fuel at any gas station in France (and they did).

Attack on USSR started as a Blitzkrieg but it soon failed because roads were bad, there were no bridges (at least stable so heavy panzers can go over them). Airfields and bridges were built from scratch that slowed Germans down. And gas stations? There weren't any.

The Bolsheviks burned all the f*ck that the Germans could use while retreating. No food, no fuel, no water, no shelter. They were basically stuck there low on ammunition.

[Bigfalcon65]

blitzkrieg is only effective on relatively small , level areas the point is to overwhelm them before the enemy could react with mountains and huge land areas it would be diffuclt with a country like germany to invade our country. it only wokred on russia because of how backward and sparsly populated it was at tthe time

I think Blitzkrieg practice proved that it worked better when it's applied on developed countries. I got a few examples:

In 1940. France got great and maintained roads, bridges and airfields. And Germany took advantage of that for going faster into enemy territory so they could surround British expeditionary force at Dunkirk. And german panzers & trucks could re-fuel at any gas station in France (and they did).

Attack on USSR started as a Blitzkrieg but it soon failed because roads were bad, there were no bridges (at least stable so heavy panzers can go over them). Airfields and bridges were built from scratch that slowed Germans down. And gas stations? There weren't any.

The Bolsheviks burned all the f*ck that the Germans could use while retreating. No food, no fuel, no water, no shelter. They were basically stuck there low on ammunition.

thus proving one of my earlier posts

[Chris7He]

Actually, Russia was being crushed and pushed back by the Nazi troops. Not to mention the US had to supply Russia with massive amounts of supplies and materials, which Russia sorely needed. Not to mention if the US and Australia hadn't been going all out on Japan, Russia would have been crushed from 2 fronts instead of one. It was because of this that Russia was able to shift it's armies from the East to the West and beat finally halt the Nazis with sheer numbers, but even then, hundreds of thousands were killed.

Capitalist bullshit...

Russia was forcing the Germans back with sheer numbers. For every T-34 (outclassed by the Tiger) they destroyed seven popped up. The Germans attempted three simultaneous assaults that split up their armies and Russia was able to deal with one of them at a time. Japan didn't touch Russia because they were too busy fighting the US... that's true, but the Russian frequently raided Manchuria.

Russia prevented disaster at Kursk and other areas. They were the first to employ female soldiers without discrimination and turned the tide. If not for Russia's involvement, Germany could have used over six thousand tanks and six million soldiers against the forces in Normandy and I'm sure that our forces could've defeated them...

Russia didn't develop the T-34 for awhile, and before that, the seasoned veterans of the Nazi troops were simply destroying everything that the Russians could throw at them. And would you care to enlightrn me on what is wrong with what I stated? That Russia was taking massive casualties? That the US supplied Russia with sorely needed materials and supplies? What?

-First women in the army: Yugoslav partisans, from April 1941.
-Hitler didn't win in his campaign in Russia because he was not a military genius. He took a byte that was just too big to swallow.
1. He couldn't maintain his lines and he had tremendous casualties behind his lines, where partisan guerrilla attacked his troops while resting.
2. He didn't have enough gasoline for his panzers.
3. Early winter prevented him from advancing faster and tanks and airplanes weren't designed for fighting on snow, mud north wind and fog (airplanes couldn't fly). 4. Russians had more manpower to just throw into every battle. Often two soldiers were given only one rifle.
5. American Aid to USSR was more and aid in medications, food and jeeps. Tanks and B-52's were sent to, but not in great numbers. Till the end of the 1944. convoys to USSR were a tricky business because Germans controlled North Sea (from Norway) and Japan controlled eastern seas. Not that many convoys made it through, and most of this help was more a gesture of good will than effective aid that really made the difference and turned the course of war to the side of the USSR.

1. He did have tremoundous casualties, but his troops inflicted far more on the Russians.
2. He did have some, the problem was that it was the worst kind of blend for the harsh Russian winter, turning the gas into gel.
3. 2 explains it
4. Yes, I know, they drafted thousands upon thousands of people, many of which didn't even have a fire arm.
5. I have already pointed out that the Germans controlled that area, and that the Japanese were busy (quite a bit, especially later on in the war, when their Navy was rendered useless due to lack of fuel) with the US and Australia.
Also, I have never said Hitler was a military genius, but he had some fairly good commanders working for him. Hitler was the blunder in Russia, because he refused to allow his troops to evacuate Stalingrad, which was what hurt him the most in the Eastern Front. Also, the supplies shipped by the US were indeed needed by the Russians and other Allies.

Wrong. The Russians captured two German armies near Stalingrad and Leningrad that totalled two million soldiers. The Japanese were not just busy with the US. China was driving Japan out. Hitler should've focused on Stalingrad and gained valuable oil and then swept upward into Moscow and then Leningrad with Finnish support.

[Chris7He]

good points

i thinkit would work in a limited combat area where airborne troops could surround enemies and tanks and aircraft could use firepower to beat the enemy into dust

Airborne troops were used as an infantry in German attacks on France and Russia. They became really "airborne" only by the end of the war.

Blitzkrieg wasn't performed in a "limited combat area". It was a full scale attack (do it quickly before enemy can re-group and counterattack).

Motorized infantry and panzers were used for this quick attack which in fact was some sort of avoiding-attack. French troops were surrounded and most of them didn't even fight the Germans.

yes, germany sent all their tanks and planes first, then followed by infantry, countires lasted a few weeks before they fell

Poland was actually overrun over night. People woke up and found themselves in a Nazi regime. Many people who though Hitler was a pushover were wrong.

[ignotus]

Wrong. The Russians captured two German armies near Stalingrad and Leningrad that totalled two million soldiers. The Japanese were not just busy with the US. China was driving Japan out. Hitler should've focused on Stalingrad and gained valuable oil and then swept upward into Moscow and then Leningrad with Finnish support.

QFT!

[Chris7He]

Wrong. The Russians captured two German armies near Stalingrad and Leningrad that totalled two million soldiers. The Japanese were not just busy with the US. China was driving Japan out. Hitler should've focused on Stalingrad and gained valuable oil and then swept upward into Moscow and then Leningrad with Finnish support.

QFT!

Finally, some of my historical understanding of World War II has been appreciated. Russia was still facing the ruins of a civil war and a half-maniacal leader. Stalin killed more people than Hitler and slaughtered innocents without discrimination. Many of the people he killed were his supporters and he used their deaths as excuses to kill more.

The war effort and America's involvement was certainly important in World War II, but without America's involvement Russia would have won, but with losses on a greater scale. Britain would have been steadily defeated and conquered, but colonial forces would have pushed the Germans out of North Africa and the Middle East. Russia would have began to overwhelm Germans who are without oil.

Without US involvement, Europe would be communist with surrounding British colonial forces that face constant Islamic uprisings. China would also have thrown back Japan and would control a large area of Asia. Without US involvement 2/3 of the world would be communist.

PS- Americans entered the war forgetting about U-boats and this was a time that Germans called 'second happy time'. The American admiral in charge thought that convoys would only 'create more targets'.

PPS- Blitzkrieg was useful against Russia during World War I due to hard unearthy terrain that prevented trenches and a wide dispersed front that allowed large military forces to overwhelm Russian defenses or find gaps. Poor communications kept defense forces from being alerted easily. This changed when Russians began employing heavy artillery and more aircraft.

[Bigfalcon65]

Wrong. The Russians captured two German armies near Stalingrad and Leningrad that totalled two million soldiers. The Japanese were not just busy with the US. China was driving Japan out. Hitler should've focused on Stalingrad and gained valuable oil and then swept upward into Moscow and then Leningrad with Finnish support.

QFT!

Finally, some of my historical understanding of World War II has been appreciated. Russia was still facing the ruins of a civil war and a half-maniacal leader. Stalin killed more people than Hitler and slaughtered innocents without discrimination. Many of the people he killed were his supporters and he used their deaths as excuses to kill more.

The war effort and America's involvement was certainly important in World War II, but without America's involvement Russia would have won, but with losses on a greater scale. Britain would have been steadily defeated and conquered, but colonial forces would have pushed the Germans out of North Africa and the Middle East. Russia would have began to overwhelm Germans who are without oil.

Without US involvement, Europe would be communist with surrounding British colonial forces that face constant Islamic uprisings. China would also have thrown back Japan and would control a large area of Asia. Without US involvement 2/3 of the world would be communist.

PS- Americans entered the war forgetting about U-boats and this was a time that Germans called 'second happy time'. The American admiral in charge thought that convoys would only 'create more targets'.

PPS- Blitzkrieg was useful against Russia during World War I due to hard unearthy terrain that prevented trenches and a wide dispersed front that allowed large military forces to overwhelm Russian defenses or find gaps. Poor communications kept defense forces from being alerted easily. This changed when Russians began employing heavy artillery and more aircraft.

you are a wise man chris, however i feel i must come out and say that germany should have won the war. They were the first to come out with jet planes which would of gave them top air superiority which would of turned the ides, america jsut joined at the right time.

[Chris7He]

QFT
Quote would be too big

I'm a Liberal Communist when I'm with the people, but if I was in charge I'd have to go with a Fascist government since I kind of believe in a government where people exchange their freedom for their country. That being said.

The US will pull out when Osama and Bush comes out of the closet and admit to having a menage et trois with Ahmadinejad (sorry man, I liked your defiance just not the anti-Jewish and homophobia thing).

[Chris7He]

you are a wise man chris, however i feel i must come out and say that germany should have won the war. They were the first to come out with jet planes which would of gave them top air superiority which would of turned the ides, america jsut joined at the right time.

Jet planes came a little late with the V3 rocket too. Russia would have won by sheer numbers and popular support.

Thanks. A lot of people in Flame Wars would disagree.

Japan was also working on a supervirus and a superplane to carry it, but the project was abandoned to put more dedication on the war effort. The project created a powerful supervirus (it was properly disposed of by the Japanese government) and the plan was load it on a giant plane (never completed) and drop it on America which would result in the destruction of the human race.

[Bigfalcon65]

you are a wise man chris, however i feel i must come out and say that germany should have won the war. They were the first to come out with jet planes which would of gave them top air superiority which would of turned the ides, america jsut joined at the right time.

Jet planes came a little late with the V3 rocket too. Russia would have won by sheer numbers and popular support.

Thanks. A lot of people in Flame Wars would disagree.

Japan was also working on a supervirus and a superplane to carry it, but the project was abandoned to put more dedication on the war effort. The project created a powerful supervirus (it was properly disposed of by the Japanese government) and the plan was load it on a giant plane (never completed) and drop it on America which would result in the destruction of the human race.

yes and the reason why we devoloped the a bomb faster was becuase of german scientists

[Chris7He]

I thought that was wrong. Amnesty for SS Officers because they knew things about rockets. It allowed Code Odessa to form (I think it's a secret organization for German officers).

Post Scriptum- How old are you? I think we should form our own club or something. You're quite the political intellectual. We should have a good talk sometime...

[Tyr]

we didnt have german sicientists till the end of the war.