75 years since VE Day

Not ideal circumstances to commemorate this, but there you go.

There has been a lot of material on TV about it and events leading up to it. In the last week or two the outcome was inevitable but the maneuvering during that time is fascinating...

• German troops doing their utmost to be captured in the west rather than falling into the hands of the Red Army.
• Donitz attempting to gain recognition for his successor administration, after purging it of the worst elements and rejecting Himmlers approaches. (Himmler harboured many delusions about what the allies might permit.)
• Churchill being nervous that De Gaulle would declare victory early.
• Disputes between the allies and the Soviets about who should be party to the surrender agreement. (Russian VE day is celebrated one day later due to delays with the signing and the timezone difference.)

And of course...

Hey, he heard good things! Have you see their brochures?

I really believe dental records rember original law and orde r about that.

Congratulations from all Americans. Oh, and from our parents and grandparents, you're welcome.

Partial end of the most destructive conflict in history. Beginning of the Cold War and the international order we're still stuck with. Yay.

Only took them kicking you in the balls to realise they were worth fighting, but thanks.

beats a kick in the ass! - as my dad used to say

better late than never! - as my dad used to say

BTW I cringe (and want to pimp-slap a bitch) every time I hear somebody refer to Pearl Harbor as a "sneak attack".
No shit? I always thought the best strategy is to let somebody know before you hit them. No wonder I was zero and fifteen in my brief but painful fighting career.

So how would you have preferred it had ended? Asking for a freund.

The ending was just fine. Probably the only way it could have ended. But you have to acknowledge that the current international order is a result of WWII and how it ended. Suppose the Germans had managed to push the Soviet Army back behind the Urals and kept them there, fighting a holding action against them? And then the D-Day invasion happens, the rest of the allies come pushing from the west, and with most of the German army tied up fighting the Soviets (which is what happened anyway, just further east and with more German losing) things worked out the same, except most of Europe winds up in Western hands? The only Soviet toe-hold would have been their occupation sector of Germany. MUCH less mischief and misery for the next seventy years.

There is an outstanding documentary on Amazon Prime (the title escapes me...sorry) that goes into the run up to WW II from the Japanese side. It's not an apology for anything the Japanese did under the rule of their military/industrial complex, but it does give an idea of why they did what they did. Well worth watching if you're interested in some deeper historical context that's very much lacking in the mainstream historical narrative.

every time I hear 'merkins talking about WW2

You think of Mary Poppins?

I don't get it

i couldn't find an image that conveyed a relief pitcher or substitute goalie adequately.

generally speaking though, the tide of WW2 was already changed and much of the heavy lifting done, by the time America became an active player.

Hahaha! Oh, do tell!

which part didn't you understand?
or is it just your general ignorance of anything that isn't 'merka, in which case, I don't have that many crayons in the house.

He's cosplaying Dayton because he misses his buddy.

Aww.

He's not wrong.

I've been watching a lot of World War II documentaries lately. Something interesting I realized is that I've always had a misproportioned sense of where D-Day falls relative to V-E Day.

Even though I know when D-Day happened and when the war ended, it takes some mental effort for me to register that it wasn't right at the end of the war, and that a year's worth of major engagements, including the Battle of the Bulge, followed it.

Obviously it was a major turning point, but I always reflexively try to place it a lot later than it actually was.

I don't know if that's something to do with how it's taught and discussed in the U.S., or if it's just a random fluke misconception that I picked up.

Celebrate VE Day by fucking over the NHS, wooooo!!!!

If the US doesn't enter the war the war in Europe is lost. That's heavy lifting. But as always Spot, I respect you're reasoned opinion.

No it’s not.

Germany was never going to be able to invade the UK because they lacked the sealift to do so and they didn’t have enough of a navy to protect a seaborne invasion force even if they’d managed to build one.

Similarly they were never going to defeat the UK through airpower because the Luftwaffe was primarily a tactical air force built to support Germany’s ground forces, not wage a strategic campaign.

So, no, the war isn’t “lost” if the US doesn’t declare, but it’s also wasn’t “won” by 1941 (or even 1945) either.

The Soviet Union probably would've still defeated Germany even if the U.S. had not intervened, though it would've been even costlier and taken longer. After the Germans failed to take the Caucasian oil fields and Moscow, the Germans had essentially failed and the Red Army pushed them back steadily. The Soviets had plenty of men and tanks to throw at them.

Now, without the U.S. army to tie up German resources in North Africa and France, and without U.S. bombers smashing German industry, the Germans might've held out longer. And German forces on the Western front would've been redeployed to the East to stop the Soviet juggernaut.

Who knows? The Germans might've stopped the Red Army long enough that British forces could've then mounted a new offensive on continental Europe in 1946. With the U.S. devoting its resources entirely to war with Japan, the war in the Pacific might've ended sooner (and without atomic bombs).

The important thing for the Western powers in this alternate history would've been the same as in reality: it's important that Nazi Germany loses, but even more important that the USSR doesn't win too big.

Damn, given how the U.S. glommed onto everything the Soviets didn't, my first thought was "carpetbagger." Too obvious?

Re: Air power.
RAF night bombing may have taken a while longer, but the collateral escalation against civilian areas would've gotten nasty for both sides. Eventually neither public has the stomach for another static war-except the home front is also the trenches.

Also, presuming no US in Europe...

Without the men or material, not sure the Commonwealth ever attempts to land in Europe after Dieppe.

German navy never really rebuilds after the Tirpitz and Bismarck. U boat numbers dwindle and the convoys continue to keep Airstrip One ( )open.

Hitler still goes after Russia and abandons Sea Lion, but when that gets turned around I don't think that Stalin pushes to Berlin without the western Allies on the continent. Soviets would take all of Poland though. Not sure how much of Japan they'd go after

Negotiated peace by '47 as Churchill would rather stop fighting Hitler than support Stalin's march any further west/within range of London.

Occupied France becomes part of greater Germany, Vichy a client state. Spain and Italy remain fascist.

How was it lost? The BoB had already been won, the Luftwaffe was in no fighting shape and unable to run anything like the long range offensive operations it once had, the Russian front had been a disaster for the Germans and the RAF was already on the offensive.

That's Germany fighting a defensive war BEFORE the US entered the fray.

EDIT: @Spaceturkey 's answer was better.

And @Paladin's.

And @shootER's