WWII Trivia

[fightingquaker13]

As far as the Germans having the best weapons, that was part of their problem. They were expensive, not always reliable, slow to produce and never really got made in large enough numbers (I'm thinking about Tiger and King Tigers and jet fighters in particular). The US and the USSR went for cheap, reliable, and good enough. As a result, there many Shermans or T-34s for every Tiger. Part of it was due to the pounding Germany was taking, but there is a time and a place for quality, and a time for cheap and adequate. By late 1942-1943, a lot of pet projects could have usefully been scrapped in favor of mass production. Hitler wouldn't here of it, and a lot of the generals weren't much better.
FQ13
PS CINCUS? Did no one ever think that might have been bad for morale? You know the Japs laughed their asses off over it.

[tombogan03884]

But that's the whole point. They didn't have developed, functional, operational "advanced designs"--much less sufficient amounts of them--when it might have done them some good, because they didn't forecast the need. They thought they could do it all with Stukas and He 111s and Ju88s and suchlike. 

They were wrong, fortunately for us and the world. 

That's the part I'm arguing Snake, By dragging America into the war, and allowing the continued existence of the Soviet Union with all the consequences that that caused over the following 50 years . Was it, in fact, good for the world ? Or do we just say that because we were on the winning side ?

[Snake45]

That's the part I'm arguing Snake, By dragging America into the war, and allowing the continued existence of the Soviet Union with all the consequences that that caused over the following 50 years . Was it, in fact, good for the world ? Or do we just say that because we were on the winning side ?

Ah, gotcha now.

Won't argue that point with you. I think it would take more metal horsepower than I can rustle up this early in the morning. Or the week. Or the year.