Amerika Bomber_History Channel Show

[Retributar]

I was watching the History Channel and the 'Bombing of America' was the topic!.

Willy Messerschmit,...showed Adolf Hitler a prototype of the Amerika Bomber,... he said to Hitler...would one-day would be able to reach America. So even though Willy only had a Non-Operable Mock-Up at the moment, he knew that Hitler was definetely interested in Long-Range-Bomber's and so being the Salesman he was, made a strong assertive argument that he could deliver such a weapon for Hitler's plan's.

According to the show, Hitler was interested in that prospect, but knew that the distance was too great at the present time, so then he had tenative plan's made up to attack 'Iceland',...in order to put airbases on it in order to launch his bombers from there!.

However the U.S. president saw the danger of Iceland being exposed to Axis forces, and so was able to arrange for U.S. forces to be stationed there, thus unkowningly, disrupting Hitler's plan to invade & occupy Iceland!.

Hitler wanted to bomb New-York in order to use this event/action to assist in forcing the U.S. to negotiate in order to get them out of the war, as he wanted to concentrate his effort's on the Eastern Front.

Also what was discussed was to do a similar effort in South America, just South of Mexico!. From there, these bombers would also be able to strike the U.S. . At that point i fell asleep, so i am unable to provide more information on this subject.

So what about an event based on this information?,...that it could be included as a random possibility in the game?. Is there any point to it at all?.

[ August 18, 2006, 03:51 AM: Message edited by: Retributar ]

[Liam]

I have seen a similar show, the likelyhood of reaching the USA with enough bombers to impact things is very unlikely. They had troubles keeping of quotas of conventional Fighters let alone such am amibitious project. Only the USA managed such a thing vs Japan and only after some time...and money

Think if America mobilized true air defense, how would the Axis of defended Iceland without a Navy? Without a UK, it's possible long term, otherwise I highly doubt bombing New York would've made any difference, besides a majority of our industry was further inland.

[Retributar]

The effect of bombing was not to weaken the U.S. militarily, but to influence it's citizenry to take an anti-war stance and put pressure on Washington to give up the war in Europe.

12,000,000 or so, people live in the New York Area today, so what was it in WW2?...7-8 Mil?, anyway, if enough of those citizen's were absorbing bomb's now and then, im sure that would affect their attitude toward's the war in Europe.

I can't figure out how Hitler figured that he would be able to bomb New-York,...as the U.S. would surely have Radar, and make it impossible to make a surprise bombing run?.

[Blashy]

They had a hard time keeping up pace with their typical bombers and airfleets, you think they ever could have managed anything like this?

They would have need naval superiority, so build more ships, more super long range bombers, more airfleets, more manpower to protect iceland.

It never could have happened, that`s simply people making a show to entertain but not dealing with the reality that it is basically science fiction.

Oh and if they by some divine miracle did build all of that..... OIL would have kept them parked in place.

When Germany did not sue for peace after taking France, that is when they lost the war.

[Konigs]

Could be said Germany lost war after they let Britsh BEF and 100,000 or so French escape at Dunkirk. Some 350,000 to 400,000 thousand soldiers as POWs would have had British public pushing for peace. Britain could not have stopped even a small Sea Lion. For that matter, the failure to launch Sea Lion after the fall of France was another point of no return. Even suffering the loss of men to British naval and Air forces, Geramns could have defeated English on thier own soil. Luftwaffe could have held air superiority over the southern end of Engalnd, then they would have developed airfields for fighters. Another point was the failure of the OKH(Hitler) to realize the siginicance of the North African campaign, sentiment in the mid east was favorable to the Axis, at least would have been until they realized the had traded one colonial yoke for another. Could have had all the oil the needed, put pressure on the Crown Jewel of India with the Japanese. Turkey would have been forced to join axis as Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria were. This would have hurt the Russian position. Plus Japanese may have been more favorable in helping defeat Russia and taking the resource rich areas of Siberia. Lets not forget the fact that the decision to take Kiev and 650,000 prisoners was was very poor. Stalin already had feelers going out to the Nazis as he sat drunk in his dacha and the wermacht was advancing to through white russia. Moscow was through out the history of Russia and is still the center of power and communications. It looks like a great hub on map. It was a primary objective and should have been taken. Leningrad was being assualted and would have been taken except for Hitler's brilliant idea of letting them die on a vine. Instead he had a city of 5,000,000 people that keep fighting for their very existance.

In general, Axis were in a position to win this war right up to the winter of 41 despite all the previous mistakes made. I think the nail in their coffin was when Hitler showed his total mental collapse and declared war on the USA. He should have at least got a commitment form Japanese to attack Russia. As this would have put the Russians in an unfavaroble two front war. The Japanese had over a million soldiers on the border with Russia. Would have caused some problems.

So in the immortal word sof Rambo, the war was deided the moment the USA was brought into the European conflict for sure.

This is for you Kuni. Having said that, I take nothing away from the Russian resolve to sacrifice all for the "Motherland." They endured more than any two or three nations and fought with a resolve that the Axis had totally under estimated. Stalin stepped out of the way and watched his generals learn how to use the "Blitzkreig" against the very creators of it. Lend lease did help keep them in it before USA entry, and it made them a mobile army by '43.

Just my two cents worth.

By the way, I have seen that show, the ultimate design they were striving for was a vehicle that would launch wirth rockets advance to the very edge of space and then would skip along between space an statosphere, they had a an idea to drop dirty bombs made of radiation. As crude as they may have been, it would have killed thousands and made thousands more sick. This could have been a problem, conventional bombing would have been useless, just check with British during the blitz, and the Germans(Speer) '42 to '45.

Just two more cents worth.

[Blashy]

Konigs,

EVEN with all those troops gone, the UK could have easily prevented Sealion.

Naval superiority, that alone could have killed a Sealion.

BUT, they also had equal air units and were actually producing MORE than Germany. So no air superiority and no naval superiority, no Sealion.

As well, Germany did not have amphibious technology, they did not even use amphibious units for Norway because of not having the ability to do so. Remember it took the allies over 3 years to develop functional amphibious technology.

The war was lost even without USA. USSR itself was outproducing tank, airfleets, artillery in 1940! They were also outproducing 4 to 1 in terms of OIL.

People can try and spin it anyway they wish, but bottom line is Germany was being outproduced and had manpower issues as early as 1940.

Have a look at these numbers on the link bellow, then ask anyone to try and explain how Germany could have won versus those overwhelming numbers AND don`t forget Russia ALONE was outproducing 4 to 1 in oil while Germany was short in 1940.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/weapons_and_manpower.htm

[ August 18, 2006, 01:04 PM: Message edited by: Blashy ]

[Liam]

Blashy, you're correct, though Konigs is also correct. Neither are wrong, Sea Lion was not at first apparent to the Germans British...thoughs soon both nations realized it was not practical. The British had Naval and Air Superiority over the Channel and that was due to the failure of Air Marshall Goering, not due to the Germans. They were beaten on the Ground, the RAF had a great commander a few brilliant strokes of luck!

The Royal Navy on the other hand could've been the victim of the Luftwaffe for months if not even half a year, god knows what would've occurred?

Letting the BEF and Free French Units depart, was so foolish! GHC Should've let Guderian cut them to cheese shreds! Without that Proffessional Army the British would've been hard pressed themselves for Manpower.

Feesibly, enough Gliders, enough Paratroopers, capturing British Ports, and letting in whatever Craft the Axis could muster, would've been if nothing else the threat to push the British out, however it is unlikely without severe losses this would've been the outcome and Hitler wasn't likely to Gamble after France, only after his arrogance began to boost by well into Barbarossa did he become utterly incompetent with egojuice. The MiddleEast was overlooked. There was value in seizing the Jugular of the British Empire. Cutting her off from Australia, New Zealand, India and basically adding to what the U-Boats were doing in the Atlantic. Axis Conquest through India was a Grand Plan for World Conquest of the Eurasia, Possible, much more so than a Bomber driving the US out of the War. The only Nation to Bomb US Soil was Japan, and she suffered dearly for it.

Originally posted by Blashy:

Konigs,

EVEN with all those troops gone, the UK could have easily prevented Sealion.

Naval superiority, that alone could have killed a Sealion.

BUT, they also had equal air units and were actually producing MORE than Germany. So no air superiority and no naval superiority, no Sealion.

As well, Germany did not have amphibious technology, they did not even use amphibious units for Norway because of not having the ability to do so. Remember it took the allies over 3 years to develop functional amphibious technology.

The war was lost even without USA. USSR itself was outproducing tank, airfleets, artillery in 1940! They were also outproducing 4 to 1 in terms of OIL.

People can try and spin it anyway they wish, but bottom line is Germany was being outproduced and had manpower issues as early as 1940.

Have a look at these numbers on the link bellow, then ask anyone to try and explain how Germany could have won versus those overwhelming numbers AND don`t forget Russia ALONE was outproducing 4 to 1 in oil while Germany was short in 1940.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/weapons_and_manpower.htm