info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
from Quora - How close was Germany and Japan to their own nuclear weapons?
7 views
Skip to first unread message
a425couple
Feb 14, 2021, 2:09:44 PM2/14/21
to
Some interesting reminders here:
from
https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
James Welch, lives in Orange County, CA (2008-present)
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Not close at all.
Neither Japan nor Germany had the following:
A team of scientists—nuclear physicists, chemists, mathematicians,
explosive experts, and others—who, just from knowing about uranium
fission, could work out how to make a nuclear bomb. Hell, they didn’t
even get a working reactor!
The funds to make this possible. Remember, it took $2,000,000,000 1945
American dollars to build the first 4 nukes (Trinity, Little Boy, Fat
Man, and “the demon core”).
The resources to make this happen. The Manhattan project, for example,
used HUGE amounts of electricity to run the isotope separation plants.
In the 1950s these plants used **8%** of American electricity. Neither
the Japanese nor the Germans could build all the extra power plants;
they just did not have the manpower to build them, nor did they have the
copper to install the generators and then transmit the power to the
plants needed.
The Alsos Mission investigated this in 1945 and found the Germans had
not only not built nukes, they didn’t even have a blueprint of how to
get there! And Japan was worse off.
Finally, in both Germany and Japan the scientific resources were spread
amongst various ministries. No coordination nor cooperation.
------------------
a response
Emmett Smith
·
February 7
During the Korean War, U.S. troops who were pursuing the fleeing North
Korean army found a huge, artificial lake in a relatively remote part of
North Korea. Two hydroelectric dams impounded the lake, but they were
not connected to the North’s power grid! This complex remained a mystery
until long after the war ended. Finally, a Japanese scientist admitted
that the dams were built by his country in World War Two as power
sources for an atomic bomb project. The Japanese also created a four
engine bomber (based on a Kawanishi seaplane design!) to carry their
bomb and drop it on U.S. forces on Okinawa or Russian forces (if they
entered the war). The project was intended to make its first atomic bomb
some time in 1946.
James Welch
·
February 7
Emmett, please provide me a link or a reference.
I have read Boris Pash's book on the Alsos mission, which he commanded,
and I have also read The Making of the Atomic Bomb and Dark Sun, both by
Richard Rhodes. All three state the Germans and the Japanese were
nowhere NEAR making a nuke.
And by the way, the power supply would have to go somewhere. Separating
U235 is a tedious process that requires large amounts of power to run
the Calutrons. During the Manhattan Project, they went to the Treasury
Department to get 15,000 tons of SILVER to wind the magnets, as there
was not enough copper available. Did your source say what the Japanese
used to separate the isotopes?
Emmett SmithNo, they went no farther than to state that Japan was trying
to assemble a nuclear complex in Korea. The area was beyond the
knowledge -or the
No, they went no farther than to state that Japan was trying to assemble
a nuclear complex in Korea. The area was beyond the knowledge -or the
bombing range-of the allies. Information about their method for making a
bomb is sadly lacking. Maybe they were not entirely certain themselves!
Or maybe they were hoping for some assistance by German scientists. In
any case, the latter was not forthcoming and Japan ran out of time.
------------------------------
Frank Duncan, Radiation expert, Extensive study of the war against Japan.
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Germany had run all of the top scientists out because they were Jewish,
and “Jewish science” was bad science. They had very few top level
scientists left, Heisenberg being the best, and had made minimal
progress. By the end of the war, they had the beginnings of a nuclear
reactor, but the British sank the ferry carrying heavy water (D2O,
deuterium oxide) in a lake in Norway, so they were prevented from any
experimentation except with natural uranium which won’t work.
The Japanese had two programs going, one run by the Navy and one run by
the Army. They were both underfunded, under manned, and neither one made
any serious progress. Both were cancelled before the end of the war.
There were rumors that both Japan and Germany had set off atomic bombs
at the end of the war, but no scientific evidence has ever been found
for it. The early bombs were VERY inefficient and would have given off a
huge flash and left a big radioactive area, none of which has ever been
found. Not even a trace.
It might be added that the facilities to separate the U238/U235 isotopes
were HUGE and required enormous amounts of electricity. This was never
available in Germany and the Japanese had no extra power too spare,
either, and in either case there has never been a trace of a facility
capable of isotope separation been found.
Please note that although both had cyclotrons that could separate
isotopes, they made nanogram quantities, not tens of kilogram quantities.
--------------------------
Dan Gall, worked at Canadian Armed Forces (1972-1997)
Answered February 8
Germany had decided in 1939 that nuclear power was not suitable for
weapons, although they were working on developing nuclear power
reactors. The allies had developed a workable ‘pile’ (early reactor) in
1942 and with 500 scientists working on it developed a bomb in July
1945. The Germans were not working on a weapon, and only had 10
scientists on the project and still hadnt built a pile in 1945. The
earliest they could have had a weapon was 1950 but more likely 1955.
The Japanese didn’t have a dedicated project and were not working on a
weapon. They had 1 scientist working on nuclear studies.
98 views · Answer requested by Phil Swanson
from
https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
James Welch, lives in Orange County, CA (2008-present)
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Not close at all.
Neither Japan nor Germany had the following:
A team of scientists—nuclear physicists, chemists, mathematicians,
explosive experts, and others—who, just from knowing about uranium
fission, could work out how to make a nuclear bomb. Hell, they didn’t
even get a working reactor!
The funds to make this possible. Remember, it took $2,000,000,000 1945
American dollars to build the first 4 nukes (Trinity, Little Boy, Fat
Man, and “the demon core”).
The resources to make this happen. The Manhattan project, for example,
used HUGE amounts of electricity to run the isotope separation plants.
In the 1950s these plants used **8%** of American electricity. Neither
the Japanese nor the Germans could build all the extra power plants;
they just did not have the manpower to build them, nor did they have the
copper to install the generators and then transmit the power to the
plants needed.
The Alsos Mission investigated this in 1945 and found the Germans had
not only not built nukes, they didn’t even have a blueprint of how to
get there! And Japan was worse off.
Finally, in both Germany and Japan the scientific resources were spread
amongst various ministries. No coordination nor cooperation.
------------------
a response
Emmett Smith
·
February 7
During the Korean War, U.S. troops who were pursuing the fleeing North
Korean army found a huge, artificial lake in a relatively remote part of
North Korea. Two hydroelectric dams impounded the lake, but they were
not connected to the North’s power grid! This complex remained a mystery
until long after the war ended. Finally, a Japanese scientist admitted
that the dams were built by his country in World War Two as power
sources for an atomic bomb project. The Japanese also created a four
engine bomber (based on a Kawanishi seaplane design!) to carry their
bomb and drop it on U.S. forces on Okinawa or Russian forces (if they
entered the war). The project was intended to make its first atomic bomb
some time in 1946.
James Welch
·
February 7
Emmett, please provide me a link or a reference.
I have read Boris Pash's book on the Alsos mission, which he commanded,
and I have also read The Making of the Atomic Bomb and Dark Sun, both by
Richard Rhodes. All three state the Germans and the Japanese were
nowhere NEAR making a nuke.
And by the way, the power supply would have to go somewhere. Separating
U235 is a tedious process that requires large amounts of power to run
the Calutrons. During the Manhattan Project, they went to the Treasury
Department to get 15,000 tons of SILVER to wind the magnets, as there
was not enough copper available. Did your source say what the Japanese
used to separate the isotopes?
Emmett SmithNo, they went no farther than to state that Japan was trying
to assemble a nuclear complex in Korea. The area was beyond the
knowledge -or the
No, they went no farther than to state that Japan was trying to assemble
a nuclear complex in Korea. The area was beyond the knowledge -or the
bombing range-of the allies. Information about their method for making a
bomb is sadly lacking. Maybe they were not entirely certain themselves!
Or maybe they were hoping for some assistance by German scientists. In
any case, the latter was not forthcoming and Japan ran out of time.
------------------------------
Frank Duncan, Radiation expert, Extensive study of the war against Japan.
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Germany had run all of the top scientists out because they were Jewish,
and “Jewish science” was bad science. They had very few top level
scientists left, Heisenberg being the best, and had made minimal
progress. By the end of the war, they had the beginnings of a nuclear
reactor, but the British sank the ferry carrying heavy water (D2O,
deuterium oxide) in a lake in Norway, so they were prevented from any
experimentation except with natural uranium which won’t work.
The Japanese had two programs going, one run by the Navy and one run by
the Army. They were both underfunded, under manned, and neither one made
any serious progress. Both were cancelled before the end of the war.
There were rumors that both Japan and Germany had set off atomic bombs
at the end of the war, but no scientific evidence has ever been found
for it. The early bombs were VERY inefficient and would have given off a
huge flash and left a big radioactive area, none of which has ever been
found. Not even a trace.
It might be added that the facilities to separate the U238/U235 isotopes
were HUGE and required enormous amounts of electricity. This was never
available in Germany and the Japanese had no extra power too spare,
either, and in either case there has never been a trace of a facility
capable of isotope separation been found.
Please note that although both had cyclotrons that could separate
isotopes, they made nanogram quantities, not tens of kilogram quantities.
--------------------------
Dan Gall, worked at Canadian Armed Forces (1972-1997)
Answered February 8
Germany had decided in 1939 that nuclear power was not suitable for
weapons, although they were working on developing nuclear power
reactors. The allies had developed a workable ‘pile’ (early reactor) in
1942 and with 500 scientists working on it developed a bomb in July
1945. The Germans were not working on a weapon, and only had 10
scientists on the project and still hadnt built a pile in 1945. The
earliest they could have had a weapon was 1950 but more likely 1955.
The Japanese didn’t have a dedicated project and were not working on a
weapon. They had 1 scientist working on nuclear studies.
98 views · Answer requested by Phil Swanson
Jim Wilkins
Feb 14, 2021, 5:38:31 PM2/14/21
to
"a425couple" wrote in message news:s0bsg...@news1.newsguy.com...
Some interesting reminders here:
from
https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
James Welch, lives in Orange County, CA (2008-present)
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Not close at all.
---------------------------------
https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/german-atomic-bomb-project
I believe the only possible German atomic weapon would have been a reactor
built into a U-boot, and left to run away and melt down near the coast. This
is what they were likely to meet:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/hitler-tried-launch-cruise-missile-attack-submarines-us-71961
"Meanwhile, the Kriegsmarine continuously micromanaged the approach vectors
of its submarines via radio transmissions. These were intercepted by Allied
intelligence, giving the U.S. Navy a fairly good idea of where the U-Boats
were approaching from."
Some interesting reminders here:
from
https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
James Welch, lives in Orange County, CA (2008-present)
Answered February 7
Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
own nuclear weapons?
Not close at all.
https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/german-atomic-bomb-project
I believe the only possible German atomic weapon would have been a reactor
built into a U-boot, and left to run away and melt down near the coast. This
is what they were likely to meet:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/hitler-tried-launch-cruise-missile-attack-submarines-us-71961
"Meanwhile, the Kriegsmarine continuously micromanaged the approach vectors
of its submarines via radio transmissions. These were intercepted by Allied
intelligence, giving the U.S. Navy a fairly good idea of where the U-Boats
were approaching from."
a425couple
Feb 14, 2021, 10:55:12 PM2/14/21
to
On 2/14/2021 11:09 AM, a425couple wrote:
> Some interesting reminders here:
>
> from
> https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
>
> Some interesting reminders here:
>
> from
> https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
>
> Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
> own nuclear weapons?
> Not close at all.
> Neither Japan nor Germany had the following:
> A team of scientists—nuclear physicists, chemists, mathematicians,
> explosive experts, and others—who, just from knowing about uranium
> fission, could work out how to make a nuclear bomb. Hell, they didn’t
> even get a working reactor!
> The funds to make this possible. Remember, it took $2,000,000,000 1945
> American dollars to build the first 4 nukes (Trinity, Little Boy, Fat
> Man, and “the demon core”).
> The resources to make this happen. The Manhattan project, for example,
> used HUGE amounts of electricity to run the isotope separation plants.
> In the 1950s these plants used **8%** of American electricity. Neither
> the Japanese nor the Germans could build all the extra power plants;
> they just did not have the manpower to build them, nor did they have the
> copper to install the generators and then transmit the power to the
> plants needed.
----
> own nuclear weapons?
> Not close at all.
> Neither Japan nor Germany had the following:
> A team of scientists—nuclear physicists, chemists, mathematicians,
> explosive experts, and others—who, just from knowing about uranium
> fission, could work out how to make a nuclear bomb. Hell, they didn’t
> even get a working reactor!
> The funds to make this possible. Remember, it took $2,000,000,000 1945
> American dollars to build the first 4 nukes (Trinity, Little Boy, Fat
> Man, and “the demon core”).
> The resources to make this happen. The Manhattan project, for example,
> used HUGE amounts of electricity to run the isotope separation plants.
> In the 1950s these plants used **8%** of American electricity. Neither
> the Japanese nor the Germans could build all the extra power plants;
> they just did not have the manpower to build them, nor did they have the
> copper to install the generators and then transmit the power to the
> plants needed.
> The allies had developed a workable ‘pile’ (early reactor) in
> 1942 and with 500 scientists working on it developed a bomb in July
> 1945. -----
> 1942 and with 500 scientists working on it developed a bomb in July
Has anyone around here read the Harry Turtledove
alternate history books "Worldwar: In the Balance"
and "Worldwar: Tilting the Balance" ?
(Worldwar series Book 1)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008OYPX1U/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldwar:_In_the_Balance
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/101527.In_the_Balance
Pleasant enough science fiction reading, that has in
the middle of our time line WWII / May 1942 an advance
set of aliens (kind of like Lizards) arrive at Earth
and try to conquer us for colonization. Almost
all humans start mostly cooperating with each other.
Anyway, the connection to the above is the USA project
at Chicago, had to move to Denver before it got
seriously close to critical mass.
Also, The aliens had set off 3 nukes for EMP,
and then thinking "shock and awe" might work,
blasted Washington DC and Berlin with A-bombs.
But, big BUT, a semi conventional big Nazi shell
hit one of the big alien spaceships that stored
multiple of their A-bombs and a conventional explosion
scattered some of their bomb core uranium.
So, humans know KNOW, what will work.
Jim Wilkins
Feb 15, 2021, 7:40:44 AM2/15/21
to
"a425couple" wrote in message news:s0bsg...@news1.newsguy.com...
During the Korean War, U.S. troops who were pursuing the fleeing North
Korean army found a huge, artificial lake in a relatively remote part of
North Korea. Two hydroelectric dams impounded the lake, but they were
not connected to the North’s power grid! This complex remained a mystery
until long after the war ended. Finally, a Japanese scientist admitted
that the dams were built by his country in World War Two as power
sources for an atomic bomb project. ...
Korean army found a huge, artificial lake in a relatively remote part of
North Korea. Two hydroelectric dams impounded the lake, but they were
not connected to the North’s power grid! This complex remained a mystery
until long after the war ended. Finally, a Japanese scientist admitted
that the dams were built by his country in World War Two as power
James Welch
--------------------------------
The scientist may have been bragging that they were as advanced as the West.
Japan suffered from lagging behind their ally Germany in technical matters
such as radar and sub/antisub tactics, while the Allies successfully kept
up. A more likely justification for building the isolated hydroelectric
plants is to make aluminum for aircraft and nitric acid for explosives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hall%E2%80%93H%C3%A9roult_process
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland%E2%80%93Eyde_process
SolomonW
Feb 15, 2021, 5:43:31 PM2/15/21
to
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 17:38:27 -0500, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> This
> is what they were likely to meet:
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/hitler-tried-launch-cruise-missile-attack-submarines-us-71961
>
> "Meanwhile, the Kriegsmarine continuously micromanaged the approach vectors
> of its submarines via radio transmissions. These were intercepted by Allied
> intelligence, giving the U.S. Navy a fairly good idea of where the U-Boats
> were approaching from."
thanks for this share, I found the use of torture interesting
> This
> is what they were likely to meet:
> https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/hitler-tried-launch-cruise-missile-attack-submarines-us-71961
>
> "Meanwhile, the Kriegsmarine continuously micromanaged the approach vectors
> of its submarines via radio transmissions. These were intercepted by Allied
> intelligence, giving the U.S. Navy a fairly good idea of where the U-Boats
> were approaching from."
Keith Willshaw
Feb 16, 2021, 4:12:09 AM2/16/21
to
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
Jim Wilkins
Feb 16, 2021, 9:22:07 AM2/16/21
to
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:s0g297$fv4$1...@dont-email.me...
On 15/02/2021 22:43, SolomonW wrote:
...
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
---------------------
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
On 15/02/2021 22:43, SolomonW wrote:
Given that the V1 was barely accurate enought to hit a target the size
of London from a land based site in northern France the best they could
have achieved is to land a missile somewhere in the New York metro area.
By that stage of the war sending U-Boats into the North Atlantic was
practically sentencing the crews to death, not only were the allies
tracking them by HF/DF but maritime patrol aircraft were becoming much
better equipped with magnetic anomaly detectors as well as centimetric
radar, diesel exhaust sniffers, sonobuoys and air dropped homing
torpedoes. By this time German submarines were only able to operate from
Norway, Denmark and Germany and had to run the gauntlet of everything
from rocket firing Typhoons and Mosquitos to RN Hunter killer submarines
and deadliest of all mines.
In April 1945 the Kriegsmarine managed to sink just 5 Allied ships in
the Atlantic for the loss of 9 U-Boats and crews but the real attition
was happening closer to home. 40 boats were sunk in European waters in
return for the loss of 14 ships and another 17 U-boats were sunk in
port. By this stage RAF Lancasters had started cracking open U-Boat pens
with the 10 ton Grand Slam bombs. The Bremen pens had multiple holes
punched through the concrete roof and became unusable.
https://uboat.net/fates/losses/1945.htm
SolomonW
Feb 16, 2021, 8:28:38 PM2/16/21
to
The importance to the NAZI
leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
(although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
they were fighting back.
You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Vincent
Feb 17, 2021, 3:16:28 AM2/17/21
to
It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
starving to death when they surrendered.
SolomonW
Feb 17, 2021, 5:10:26 AM2/17/21
to
So???
In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American in
ww2 then a German.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n0BpQj9jqc
>
> It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
> The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
> butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
> sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
> thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
> their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
> Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
> you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
> starving to death when they surrendered.
lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
Vincent
Feb 18, 2021, 1:15:58 AM2/18/21
to
the other.
>
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n0BpQj9jqc
>
>
>
>>
>> It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
>> The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
>> butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
>> sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
>> thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
>> their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
>> Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
>> you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
>> starving to death when they surrendered.
>
>
> And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
> lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n0BpQj9jqc
>
>
>
>>
>> It took a $2 Billion nuclear attack to end WWII'
>> The Murmansk run kept Russia from falling. The guns and
>> butter runs were what kept England from collapsing. The
>> sailors and ships on those runs paid dearly with thousands of ships and
>> thousands of sailors etc dying. The Germans lost the desert war when
>> their Tanks ran out of fuel. Same story at the battle of Kursk in
>> Russia. If the German war machine had not had its logistics curtailed
>> you might be speaking German today. Japan and Germany were virtually
>> starving to death when they surrendered.
>
>
> And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that they
> lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
Nations Wilson.
As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
SolomonW
Feb 18, 2021, 3:44:32 AM2/18/21
to
Germans agreed to pull their troops out of France, Belgium and Luxembourg
within 15 days, or risk becoming prisoners of the Allies. They had to turn
over their arsenal, including 5,000 artillery pieces, 25,000 machine guns
and 1,700 airplanes, along with 5,000 railroad locomotives, 5,000 trucks
and 150,000 wagons. Germany also had to give up the contested territory of
Alsace-Lorraine. And they agreed to the indignity of Allied forces
occupying German territory along the Rhine, where they would stay until
1930.
>
> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
> remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
> over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
> and our as wipe President Wilson.
> A war that could have ended much
> earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
> Instead it led us
> into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going!
> They also expected harsh
> penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
Keith Willshaw
Feb 18, 2021, 4:15:09 AM2/18/21
to
On 17/02/2021 01:28, SolomonW wrote:
>
> War is not just an accounting exercise.
>
> The importance to the NAZI
> leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
> (although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
> they were fighting back.
>
> You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
> with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
>
You may notice a pattern developing here, both Germany and Iraq lost and
>
> War is not just an accounting exercise.
>
> The importance to the NAZI
> leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
> (although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the people
> they were fighting back.
>
> You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
> with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
>
both were of course the original aggressors. The V1 was a low cost
weapon and made some sense, the V2 was ludicrous. It was expensive,
required huge amounts of resources and labour and most of those launched
missed their targets by miles. Daftest of all it was not doing anything
to stop the Red Army reaching Berlin or 1000 bomber raids burning out
one German city after another.
The reality is that to win a global war you need an efficient economy,
that of Nazi Germany was far from efficient. Britain and the
Commonwealth alone out prduced Germany in terms of weapons. When you add
in the Soviet and US production it was no contest.
This became apparent during the Battle of Britain. In the air the
fighting was close, in the factories it was a walk over. Throughout the
campaign the RAF remained at full strength, losses in pilots and
aircraft were replaced. Indeed the fact that they had almost 1200 pilots
for the 720 aircraft meant that at the height of fighting men were still
being sent on leave.That was not true of the Luftwaffe.
On Sept 3 1940 while Goering was boasting the RAF was down to its last
100 fighters Hugo Sperrle was touring Luftwaffe Bases in France and
finding many of the units were seriously under strength, the Lufwaffe
was seriously under strength as its training and repair systems just
couldnt keep pace. A damaged Me-109 would be sent back to the factory in
Germany for repair. An RAF fighter would be shipped to a local repair
centre and replaced from stock.
Imagine the reaction of Luftwaffe pilots over London in September to be
hit by waves of fighters some of them big wings of 60 or more aircraft.
When you look at the nuclear program the Germans fatally damaged it by
splitting the limited resources available across multiple teams. There
was just about enough heavy water for one reactor but not enough for
two. The prototype they built at Haigerloch in 1945 was hopeless, There
was not enough nuclear fuel or heavy water to achieve criticality and it
had no control rods ! They intended to control it by varying the level
of heavy water in the pile.
Compare and contrast with the alied approach where the UK, USA and
Canada pooled their resources. The team lead by Enrico Fermi who built
Chicago Pile No 1 under a disused rackets court in just 6 months.
Keith Willshaw
Feb 18, 2021, 4:27:55 AM2/18/21
to
On 18/02/2021 06:16, Vincent wrote:
>
> They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
> Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
> a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
> biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
> Nations Wilson.
>
> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
> remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
> over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
> and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
> earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
> into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
> penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions and
>
> They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
> Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was
> a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
> biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
> Nations Wilson.
>
> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
> remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
> over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
> and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
> earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
> into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
> penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
returned home, their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval
base at Scapa Floe and they were forbidden to have military aircraft.
The mistake the Allies made was not demanding unconditional surrender
and rubbing the their noses in the stink they made for themselves.
The German war plan of course was to starve Britain out of the war, turn
about is fair play but the reality of German starvation was that it was
self inflicted. German agricultural production collapsed as the horses
German farmers relied upon for farming were seized by the Army who also
seized all stocks of the Nitrate fertilisers for making explosives. In
contrast the British mobilised women in the British Land Army to ensure
that every possible scrap of land was used for agriculture. By wars end
23,000 women had been conscripted for this purpose and the munitions
factories workers were 90% female.
SolomonW
Feb 18, 2021, 11:54:12 PM2/18/21
to
On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 09:15:07 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
> The V1 was a low cost
> weapon and made some sense,
Cost/benefit analysis it was a brilliant weapon, its very lucky that
> The V1 was a low cost
> weapon and made some sense,
Germany did not have it in bulk during the battle of Britain.
Vincent
Feb 19, 2021, 1:55:13 AM2/19/21
to
and the Armistice. We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The
English more so then us. You can rewrite history all you want, but the
facts still remain. England was the perpetrator of continuing that war
when Germany tried to negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody.
Shithead Wilson got America into a war actually perpetrated by the
English! Some of the American states refused to allow the Federal
Government to send their citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was
NOT totally a coalition. The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within
Germany at the Behest of the English. German Troops had to return to
Germany in order to put down this revolution. To this day there are
Bolsheviks within the English Government. The Russians were kind enough
to publish papers highlighting this connection back then. Also the
Russians removed themselves from that war. Germany could well have
overrun France at that time but instead chose to negotiate an end.
People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
>
>
>>
>> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
>> remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
>> over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
>> and our as wipe President Wilson.
>
> They had good reasosn to stop fighting in ww1.
>
>> A war that could have ended much
>> earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
>
> I like to know who this Honorable German leader was?
If you are too fucking stupid to know that! I am wasting my time with a
>
>>
>> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
>> remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
>> over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
>> and our as wipe President Wilson.
>
> They had good reasosn to stop fighting in ww1.
>
>> A war that could have ended much
>> earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
>
> I like to know who this Honorable German leader was?
fool.
AR!
>
>> Instead it led us
>> into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going!
>
> Oh it went wrong alright.
>
>> They also expected harsh
>> penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
>
> Not sorry for them about the hatsh penalties from the Russians.
More stupidity on your part.
>> Instead it led us
>> into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going!
>
> Oh it went wrong alright.
>
>> They also expected harsh
>> penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they got.
>
> Not sorry for them about the hatsh penalties from the Russians.
Change your net NYM as Solomon was a man of Wisdom and obviously you
are not.
Vincent
Feb 19, 2021, 2:29:06 AM2/19/21
to
On 2/18/2021 3:27 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
> On 18/02/2021 06:16, Vincent wrote:
>
>>
>> They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
>> Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar
>> was a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
>> biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
>> Nations Wilson.
>>
>> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
>> remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
>> over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
>> and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
>> earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
>> into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
>> penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they
>> got.
>
> It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions and
> returned home,
As agreed on by the Armistice.
> On 18/02/2021 06:16, Vincent wrote:
>
>>
>> They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
>> Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar
>> was a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the
>> biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league of
>> Nations Wilson.
>>
>> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
>> remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when
>> over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits
>> and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could have ended much
>> earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader. Instead it led us
>> into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also expected harsh
>> penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is exactly what they
>> got.
>
> It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions and
> returned home,
their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval
dealing and inbred Aristocracy leadership is what led to ending the
English Empire. Sadly My America is now living somewhat the same strategies.
> base at Scapa Floe and they were forbidden to have military aircraft.
> The mistake the Allies made was not demanding unconditional surrender
> and rubbing the their noses in the stink they made for themselves.
We were all guilty to some percentage. England and the French have been
up to their eyeballs in creating 2 world wars. America had riots in the
streets of its major cities against being involved. We should have let
the combatants duke it out or it is more likely to have been a
negotiated armistice that would have prevented a bigger WWI and perhaps
totally negated a WWII'
>
> The German war plan of course was to starve Britain out of the war
You gotta be kidding? Germany certainly had no designs on taking England
> The German war plan of course was to starve Britain out of the war
in either World war.
, turn
> about is fair play but the reality of German starvation was that it was
> self inflicted. German agricultural production collapsed as the horses
> German farmers relied upon for farming were seized by the Army who also
> seized all stocks of the Nitrate fertilisers for making explosives. In
> contrast the British mobilised women in the British Land Army to ensure
> that every possible scrap of land was used for agriculture. By wars end
> 23,000 women had been conscripted for this purpose and the munitions
> factories workers were 90% female.
Butter that kept you afloat in both wars. Germany did not have that
kindness extended toward it. Not only was a lot of England inbred
Nobility bad leaders, but much of it was the Offal of Germany inbred
nobility that had integrated with.
I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
England's Battle in WWII.
The Problem is the American Soldier
He is overpaid
He is over sexed
and He is over here.
One of Winston Churchill's wisdom's. Along of course with his many fuck
ups. Such as the mess in South Africa and the Boer war. Just a result of
English Nobleman being dead broke and bought like a centerpiece by an
American Jewish business Millionaire that had a Daughter that wanted a
Noble name and gave birth to Son that the English venerated no matter
how stupid he became.
Dunkirk, Where Hitler in WWII gave England a pass so that they could
take their soldiers home and not be decimated. It is thought by some
that Hitler actually thought the English would side against the Russian
Bolsheviks.
America separated from The British Empire in order to get away from such
strategies and now are in the same decline that destroyed the "sun never
goes down on the Empire".
Keith Willshaw
Feb 19, 2021, 4:46:27 AM2/19/21
to
On 19/02/2021 06:55, Vincent wrote:
>
> You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back
> and the Armistice. We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The
> English more so then us. You can rewrite history all you want, but the
> facts still remain. England was the perpetrator of continuing that war
> when Germany tried to negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody.
> Shithead Wilson got America into a war actually perpetrated by the
> English! Some of the American states refused to allow the Federal
> Government to send their citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was
> NOT totally a coalition. The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within
> Germany at the Behest of the English. German Troops had to return to
> Germany in order to put down this revolution. To this day there are
> Bolsheviks within the English Government. The Russians were kind enough
> to publish papers highlighting this connection back then. Also the
> Russians removed themselves from that war. Germany could well have
> overrun France at that time but instead chose to negotiate an end.
> People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
> recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
Enough of fantasy land.
>
> You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back
> and the Armistice. We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The
> English more so then us. You can rewrite history all you want, but the
> facts still remain. England was the perpetrator of continuing that war
> when Germany tried to negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody.
> Shithead Wilson got America into a war actually perpetrated by the
> English! Some of the American states refused to allow the Federal
> Government to send their citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was
> NOT totally a coalition. The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within
> Germany at the Behest of the English. German Troops had to return to
> Germany in order to put down this revolution. To this day there are
> Bolsheviks within the English Government. The Russians were kind enough
> to publish papers highlighting this connection back then. Also the
> Russians removed themselves from that war. Germany could well have
> overrun France at that time but instead chose to negotiate an end.
> People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
> recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
England declared war because Germany invaded neutral Belgium and had
treaties that required it to come to its defence. The USA entered the
war because German U-Boats were sinking its ships on the high seas.
The reality is that in 1918 Germany was in terminal collapse, their last
defences had beem been breached.In nine days the British, French and US
forces crossed the Canal du Nord, broke through the Hindenburg Line and
took tens of thousands of prisoners and guns. This left what by now were
mobile motorised and armoured forces a clear run into Germany. On the
home front a full scale revolution was in progress in Germany and the
army was needed to restore order. By this point their allies, the Austro
Hungarian and Ottoman empires had collapsed, the armaments factories
were on strike. The German military had competent commanders in the
field but terribly mismanaged the war economy.Starving people do not
fight well.
The allies on the other hand were now well equipped, had an integrated
command structure and were using all arms strategy coordinating attacks
by air land and sea. The Armistice arrived just in time to prevent a
major attack from RN aircraft carriers on German naval bases.
The second battle of Cambrai ended up in a panicked German withdrawal,
second Candian division marched into the town with bands playing on 10th
October taking less than 20 casualties in the process as the German Army
fled east. The destruction they did in the process was a large part of
the reason the French and Belgians were adamant that the terms of an
armistice must be harsh.
The negotiator from the German Government was told to get an armistice
under ANY conditions.
As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation. It was Germany that
sent Lenin to Russia ! At least try and be accurate, the revolutionaries
in Germany were known as the Spartacist League who based their movement
on the Bolsheviks.
Keith Willshaw
Feb 19, 2021, 5:13:13 AM2/19/21
to
On 19/02/2021 07:29, Vincent wrote:
> On 2/18/2021 3:27 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
> I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
> England's Battle in WWII.
>
> The Problem is the American Soldier
> He is overpaid
> He is over sexed
> and He is over here.
>
That was a not the attitude of the British Government, armed forces or
> On 2/18/2021 3:27 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
> I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
> England's Battle in WWII.
>
> The Problem is the American Soldier
> He is overpaid
> He is over sexed
> and He is over here.
>
most people. Churchill wanted the USA as an ally and when that happened
he rejoiced. As for the normal people one of the biggest exports in 1945
was in the form of war brides.
In fact the first use of that phrase is attributed to a US Official
badgering British people about what they felt about the US Troops. One
person replied
“Well, they’re over-dressed, they’re over-paid, they’re over-sexed, and
they’re over here.”
In turned out he was a comedian and the second part of what he said is
rarely quoted
"There are objections to the English soldier too, he said we are
Underpaid, underdressed, undersexed and—under Eisenhower!"
This is called having a sense of humour, you may want to try it some time.
Ramsman
Feb 19, 2021, 6:06:52 AM2/19/21
to
laughable.
--
Peter
Geoffrey Sinclair
Feb 19, 2021, 6:08:24 AM2/19/21
to
"Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
news:s0npc1$lvo$1...@dont-email.me...
"4. Surrender of 160 U-boats, 8 light cruisers, 6 Dreadnoughts; the rest of
the fleet to be disarmed and controlled by the Allies in neutral or Allied
harbors. "
The fleet sailed to Scapa Flow.
> Just more double dealing by the English.
The German fleet at Scapa largely scuttled itself.
> The very long history of double dealing and inbred Aristocracy leadership
> is what led to ending the English Empire. Sadly My America is now living
> somewhat the same strategies.
So inbred leadership results in a world wide empire?
>> base at Scapa Floe and they were forbidden to have military aircraft. The
>> mistake the Allies made was not demanding unconditional surrender and
>> rubbing the their noses in the stink they made for themselves.
>
> Uh Huh, So as per usual the entire war was blamed on one small country.
Germany is small? Or is that Austria-Hungary?
> We were all guilty to some percentage.
So your assessment of your current guilt for places like North Korea
and Somalia is?
> England and the French have been up to their eyeballs in creating 2 world
> wars.
Actually for both wars the British were trying to avoid it, WWI saw the
French
caught up in the quick decisive war belief, WWII the French were trying to
avoid.
> America had riots in the streets of its major cities against being
> involved.
So name the cities and dates.
https://depts.washington.edu/antiwar/WW1_reds.shtml
For an idea of those who were against the war.
> We should have let the combatants duke it out or it is more likely to have
> been a negotiated armistice that would have prevented a bigger WWI and
> perhaps totally negated a WWII'
Versus exhaustion lays much of Europe open to Communism like
happened to Russia.
>> The German war plan of course was to starve Britain out of the war
>
> You gotta be kidding? Germany certainly had no designs on taking England
> in either World war.
That is simply false, the U-boat campaigns for a start, Britain down to
weeks of food in WWI. The pre war fleet build up.
> , turn
>> about is fair play but the reality of German starvation was that it was
>> self inflicted. German agricultural production collapsed as the horses
>> German farmers relied upon for farming were seized by the Army who also
>> seized all stocks of the Nitrate fertilisers for making explosives. In
>> contrast the British mobilised women in the British Land Army to ensure
>> that every possible scrap of land was used for agriculture. By wars end
>> 23,000 women had been conscripted for this purpose and the munitions
>> factories workers were 90% female.
>
> I guess you forgot the thousands of shiploads of American Guns and Butter
> that kept you afloat in both wars.
Actually not afloat, but more mobilised than otherwise so fewer US
combat units were required, it also shortened the war, versus the
costs of converting combat units back into workers while the US
converted workers into combat units.
Similar for the USSR, the supplies delivered to end 1942 were not
enough to make the difference between staying and leaving the war.
Think of the deaths in Leningrad and Stalingrad as an idea of the
staying power of Stalin's government.
> Germany did not have that kindness extended toward it.
Actually is did, given it looted occupied Europe for food, exporting
hunger.
> Not only was a lot of England inbred Nobility bad leaders, but much of it
> was the Offal of Germany inbred nobility that had integrated with.
So bad a bunch of leaders they ended up with a rather large empire,
using the then definition of bad.
> I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
> England's Battle in WWII.
Good to know the USA had no reason to fight.
> The Problem is the American Soldier
> He is overpaid
> He is over sexed
> and He is over here.
Versus Underpaid, under sexed and under Eisenhower.
> One of Winston Churchill's wisdom's.
So show it was Churchill. Not a British comedian.
http://ww2f.com/threads/origin-of-phrase-overpaid-oversexed-and-over-here.14674/
> Along of course with his many fuck ups. Such as the mess in South Africa
> and the Boer war.
Churchill had nothing to do with the origins or running of the Boer war.
> Just a result of
> English Nobleman being dead broke and bought like a centerpiece by an
> American Jewish business Millionaire that had a Daughter that wanted a
> Noble name and gave birth to Son that the English venerated no matter how
> stupid he became.
So show Jeannie or her father were Jewish.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/29780075?seq=1
> Dunkirk, Where Hitler in WWII gave England a pass so that they could take
> their soldiers home and not be decimated.
The halt order was done by the army, several times actually, and Hitler
endorsed it. The military reasons were extended flanks, tank strengths
and the terrain between where the Germans were and places like
Dunkirk.
> It is thought by some that Hitler actually thought the English would side
> against the Russian Bolsheviks.
I understand the main believer flew to Britain with the intended offer, and
was repudiated.
> America separated from The British Empire in order to get away from such
> strategies
And the 20th century would have played out very differently had the US
still been part of the Empire and so entering the wars when Britain did.
> and now are in the same decline that destroyed the "sun never goes down on
> the Empire".
Not a decline in absolute terms but relative to the rest of the world.
Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
news:s0npc1$lvo$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 2/18/2021 3:27 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>> It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions and
>> returned home,
>
> As agreed on by the Armistice.
>
> their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval
Point 14 of the armistice terms,
>> It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions and
>> returned home,
>
> As agreed on by the Armistice.
>
> their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval
"4. Surrender of 160 U-boats, 8 light cruisers, 6 Dreadnoughts; the rest of
the fleet to be disarmed and controlled by the Allies in neutral or Allied
harbors. "
The fleet sailed to Scapa Flow.
> Just more double dealing by the English.
> The very long history of double dealing and inbred Aristocracy leadership
> is what led to ending the English Empire. Sadly My America is now living
> somewhat the same strategies.
>> base at Scapa Floe and they were forbidden to have military aircraft. The
>> mistake the Allies made was not demanding unconditional surrender and
>> rubbing the their noses in the stink they made for themselves.
>
> Uh Huh, So as per usual the entire war was blamed on one small country.
> We were all guilty to some percentage.
and Somalia is?
> England and the French have been up to their eyeballs in creating 2 world
> wars.
French
caught up in the quick decisive war belief, WWII the French were trying to
avoid.
> America had riots in the streets of its major cities against being
> involved.
https://depts.washington.edu/antiwar/WW1_reds.shtml
For an idea of those who were against the war.
> We should have let the combatants duke it out or it is more likely to have
> been a negotiated armistice that would have prevented a bigger WWI and
> perhaps totally negated a WWII'
happened to Russia.
>> The German war plan of course was to starve Britain out of the war
>
> You gotta be kidding? Germany certainly had no designs on taking England
> in either World war.
weeks of food in WWI. The pre war fleet build up.
> , turn
>> about is fair play but the reality of German starvation was that it was
>> self inflicted. German agricultural production collapsed as the horses
>> German farmers relied upon for farming were seized by the Army who also
>> seized all stocks of the Nitrate fertilisers for making explosives. In
>> contrast the British mobilised women in the British Land Army to ensure
>> that every possible scrap of land was used for agriculture. By wars end
>> 23,000 women had been conscripted for this purpose and the munitions
>> factories workers were 90% female.
>
> I guess you forgot the thousands of shiploads of American Guns and Butter
> that kept you afloat in both wars.
combat units were required, it also shortened the war, versus the
costs of converting combat units back into workers while the US
converted workers into combat units.
Similar for the USSR, the supplies delivered to end 1942 were not
enough to make the difference between staying and leaving the war.
Think of the deaths in Leningrad and Stalingrad as an idea of the
staying power of Stalin's government.
> Germany did not have that kindness extended toward it.
hunger.
> Not only was a lot of England inbred Nobility bad leaders, but much of it
> was the Offal of Germany inbred nobility that had integrated with.
using the then definition of bad.
> I remember England's attitude toward American Servicemen fighting
> England's Battle in WWII.
> The Problem is the American Soldier
> He is overpaid
> He is over sexed
> and He is over here.
> One of Winston Churchill's wisdom's.
http://ww2f.com/threads/origin-of-phrase-overpaid-oversexed-and-over-here.14674/
> Along of course with his many fuck ups. Such as the mess in South Africa
> and the Boer war.
> Just a result of
> English Nobleman being dead broke and bought like a centerpiece by an
> American Jewish business Millionaire that had a Daughter that wanted a
> Noble name and gave birth to Son that the English venerated no matter how
> stupid he became.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/29780075?seq=1
> Dunkirk, Where Hitler in WWII gave England a pass so that they could take
> their soldiers home and not be decimated.
endorsed it. The military reasons were extended flanks, tank strengths
and the terrain between where the Germans were and places like
Dunkirk.
> It is thought by some that Hitler actually thought the English would side
> against the Russian Bolsheviks.
was repudiated.
> America separated from The British Empire in order to get away from such
> strategies
still been part of the Empire and so entering the wars when Britain did.
> and now are in the same decline that destroyed the "sun never goes down on
> the Empire".
Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
Geoffrey Sinclair
Feb 19, 2021, 6:08:27 AM2/19/21
to
"Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
news:s0nncf$9ac$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 2/18/2021 2:44 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>> The word was an Armistice, but it was a surrender. In the agreement the
>> Germans agreed to pull their troops out of France, Belgium and Luxembourg
>> within 15 days, or risk becoming prisoners of the Allies. They had to
>> turn
>> over their arsenal, including 5,000 artillery pieces, 25,000 machine guns
>> and 1,700 airplanes, along with 5,000 railroad locomotives, 5,000 trucks
>> and 150,000 wagons. Germany also had to give up the contested territory
>> of
>> Alsace-Lorraine. And they agreed to the indignity of Allied forces
>> occupying German territory along the Rhine, where they would stay until
>> 1930.
>
> You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back and
> the Armistice.
https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Conventions_and_Treaties
>> The word was an Armistice, but it was a surrender. In the agreement the
>> Germans agreed to pull their troops out of France, Belgium and Luxembourg
>> within 15 days, or risk becoming prisoners of the Allies. They had to
>> turn
>> over their arsenal, including 5,000 artillery pieces, 25,000 machine guns
>> and 1,700 airplanes, along with 5,000 railroad locomotives, 5,000 trucks
>> and 150,000 wagons. Germany also had to give up the contested territory
>> of
>> Alsace-Lorraine. And they agreed to the indignity of Allied forces
>> occupying German territory along the Rhine, where they would stay until
>> 1930.
>
> You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back and
> the Armistice.
All part of the armistice terms.
> We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The English more so then us.
> You can rewrite history all you want, but the facts still remain.
> England was the perpetrator of continuing that war when Germany tried to
> negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody.
> Shithead Wilson got America into a war actually perpetrated by the
> English!
backed by Russia, backed by France with Britain sitting outside things
until the brilliant German plan to invade Belgium was done, given
Britain had a treaty with Belgium.
The Austria-Hungary government rejected a Serbian note that
gave them just about all their demands. The Serbian government
pointing out that a relatively minor part would require them to break
their own laws.
America found itself involved via attacks on its shipping and the
Zimmerman telegram.
> Some of the American states refused to allow the Federal Government to
> send their citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was NOT totally a
> coalition. The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within Germany at the
> Behest of the English.
German government. The revolutions in Germany were local, not
outside organised.
> German Troops had to return to Germany in order to put down this
> revolution.
>To this day there are Bolsheviks within the English Government.
> The Russians were kind enough to publish papers highlighting this
> connection back then.
documents?
> Also the Russians removed themselves from that war.
the treaty involved and then compare it to Versailles.
> Germany could well have overrun France at that time but instead chose to
> negotiate an end.
and the condition the German army was in after them, followed by the
breaching of the Hindenburg line. The way the German army began
falling to pieces.
And the German army in the east was rather busy during 1917, keeping
an eye on the Russians and trying to funnel resources towards Germany.
Interesting to note even with the Ukraine available how Germany ran out
of food.
> People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
> recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
continues fighting and that is someone else's fault?
>>> A war that could have ended much
>>> earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
>>
>> I like to know who this Honorable German leader was?
>
> If you are too fucking stupid to know that! I am wasting my time with a
> fool.
So in other words no evidence.
Geoffrey Sinclair
Feb 19, 2021, 6:08:31 AM2/19/21
to
"Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
news:s0l0ms$pr$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 2/17/2021 4:10 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>> In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American
>> in
>> ww2 then a German.
>
> Logistics won that war for one side and lack of logistics lost it for the
> other.
Logistics is part, not all.
>> In any case, its importance is much more critical in a study of American
>> in
>> ww2 then a German.
>
> Logistics won that war for one side and lack of logistics lost it for the
> other.
>> And what kept the Germans fighting in ww2 long after it was clear that
>> they
>> lost? In ww1, they surrendered before the allies came to Germany.
>
> They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
> Armistice!
> They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar was a dishonor
> and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of the biggest horses ass
> on the planet, President gotta have a league of Nations Wilson.
What specifically rates as the dishonour?
I suppose you are aware as the Germans retreated and then left France
they took as much as the could and destroyed much of what they could
not take. Flooding coal mines for example, petty things like destroying
Medieval castles.
So strangely enough the French and Belgians wanted things from
Germany to cover their losses and repair bills. Go look up the
clauses in the treaty of Brest-Litovsk as another example of
treaties of the time.
> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they well
> remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly 1923 when over
> 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the fucking Brits and our
> as wipe President Wilson.
million that is simply adding the deaths before the armistice, the post
war flu and starvation deaths together then adding extras. The civil
death toll to famine from 1914 to 1919 was estimated at around
850,000 by the Germans with 750,000 wartime deaths reported
during the treaty negotiations. Later checks indicate the total is
more likely to be the total flu and famine victims and may be
exaggerated.
The blockade was lifted with the signing of the Versailles treaty in
June 1919.
> A war that could have ended much earlier as suggested by an Honorable
> German leader.
> Instead it led us into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They also
> expected harsh penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And that is
> exactly what they got.
imposed communist rule on East Germany.
Removing Russia from WWI was why Lenin was moved across Germany
in a sealed rail carriage, so he could be sent to Russia. The WWI treaty
was very useful to Lenin, legitimising his government and allowing him to
consolidate power.
Jim Wilkins
Feb 19, 2021, 6:53:38 AM2/19/21
to
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:s0o1di$iul$1...@dont-email.me...
On 19/02/2021 06:55, Vincent wrote:
>
> You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back and
> the Armistice. We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The English more
> so then us. You can rewrite history all you want, but the facts still
> remain. England was the perpetrator of continuing that war when Germany
> tried to negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody. Shithead Wilson
> got America into a war actually perpetrated by the English! Some of the
> American states refused to allow the Federal Government to send their
> citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was NOT totally a coalition.
> The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within Germany at the Behest of the
> English. German Troops had to return to Germany in order to put down this
> revolution. To this day there are Bolsheviks within the English
> Government. The Russians were kind enough to publish papers highlighting
> this connection back then. Also the Russians removed themselves from that
> war. Germany could well have overrun France at that time but instead chose
> to negotiate an end.
> People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
> recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
Enough of fantasy land.
England declared war because Germany invaded neutral Belgium and had
treaties that required it to come to its defence. The USA entered the
war because German U-Boats were sinking its ships on the high seas.
----------------------------
That, plus the Zimmermann telegram.
https://www.theworldwar.org/learn/wwi/zimmermann-telegram
Britain risked alienating the US by bugging our communications channels.
https://history.blog.gov.uk/2017/01/16/the-zimmermann-telegram-and-room-40/
"Whilst the British authorities wanted to pass this information to the
Americans, to do so would reveal that communications were being intercepted.
The Americans would not appreciate the thought that their signals might also
be collected. If the Germans then became aware of this and changed their
codes, the intelligence advantage would be lost. ... The answer was that
there were several copies of the telegram, with slightly different language.
By handing over the decoded version sent via the German Embassy in
Washington to Mexico, the British Government hoped to hide the fact that the
message had been intercepted, so that it would appear that the document had
been leaked in Mexico instead."
On 19/02/2021 06:55, Vincent wrote:
>
> You better read that again. All you mention, came after the pull back and
> the Armistice. We Dishonored ourselves on that Armistice. The English more
> so then us. You can rewrite history all you want, but the facts still
> remain. England was the perpetrator of continuing that war when Germany
> tried to negotiate an end without sanctions on anybody. Shithead Wilson
> got America into a war actually perpetrated by the English! Some of the
> American states refused to allow the Federal Government to send their
> citizens to that war. The Rainbow Coalition was NOT totally a coalition.
> The Bolsheviks created a Revolution within Germany at the Behest of the
> English. German Troops had to return to Germany in order to put down this
> revolution. To this day there are Bolsheviks within the English
> Government. The Russians were kind enough to publish papers highlighting
> this connection back then. Also the Russians removed themselves from that
> war. Germany could well have overrun France at that time but instead chose
> to negotiate an end.
> People in Germany and Europe were starving and the Aristocrats of Europe
> recommended a negotiated end in order to bring back a viable economy.
Enough of fantasy land.
England declared war because Germany invaded neutral Belgium and had
treaties that required it to come to its defence. The USA entered the
war because German U-Boats were sinking its ships on the high seas.
That, plus the Zimmermann telegram.
https://www.theworldwar.org/learn/wwi/zimmermann-telegram
Britain risked alienating the US by bugging our communications channels.
https://history.blog.gov.uk/2017/01/16/the-zimmermann-telegram-and-room-40/
"Whilst the British authorities wanted to pass this information to the
Americans, to do so would reveal that communications were being intercepted.
The Americans would not appreciate the thought that their signals might also
be collected. If the Germans then became aware of this and changed their
codes, the intelligence advantage would be lost. ... The answer was that
there were several copies of the telegram, with slightly different language.
By handing over the decoded version sent via the German Embassy in
Washington to Mexico, the British Government hoped to hide the fact that the
message had been intercepted, so that it would appear that the document had
been leaked in Mexico instead."
Keith Willshaw
Feb 19, 2021, 4:52:01 PM2/19/21
to
On 19/02/2021 12:17, Jeff wrote:
> On 19/02/2021 07:29, Vincent wrote:
> On 19/02/2021 07:29, Vincent wrote:
>> On 2/18/2021 3:27 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>> On 18/02/2021 06:16, Vincent wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
>>>> Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar
>>>> was a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of
>>>> the biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league
>>>> of Nations Wilson.
>>>>
>>>> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they
>>>> well remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly
>>>> 1923 when over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the
>>>> fucking Brits and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could
>>>> have ended much earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
>>>> Instead it led us into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They
>>>> also expected harsh penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And
>>>> that is exactly what they got.
>>>
>>> It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions
>>> and returned home,
>>
>> As agreed on by the Armistice.
>>
>> their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval
>
>
> Utter rubbish!!!
>>> On 18/02/2021 06:16, Vincent wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> They did not surrender. Your history is a bit bent. The word was
>>>> Armistice! They were defrauded.The So-called surrender in the boxcar
>>>> was a dishonor and perpetrated by the Allies under the guidance of
>>>> the biggest horses ass on the planet, President gotta have a league
>>>> of Nations Wilson.
>>>>
>>>> As for continued fighting, Germany was starving to death and they
>>>> well remembered the English Blockade from Wars end until roughly
>>>> 1923 when over 3 million Germans died of starvation thanks to the
>>>> fucking Brits and our as wipe President Wilson. A war that could
>>>> have ended much earlier as suggested by an Honorable German leader.
>>>> Instead it led us into the Second WWII. Nice fucking going! They
>>>> also expected harsh penalties from the Bolsheviks of Russia. And
>>>> that is exactly what they got.
>>>
>>> It was a de facto surrender, the German Army abandoned its positions
>>> and returned home,
>>
>> As agreed on by the Armistice.
>>
>> their fleet was seized and ended up in the British Naval
>
>
>
> The German Fleet was interned in various ports, a significant portion at
> Scappa Flow, whist the Allies tried to agree what to do with the ships.
> They were divided, most wanted the ships to be divided between the
> navies, but Britain wanted them scrapped to prevent other nations, the
> US in particular, gaining naval superiority.
>
I doubt the US wanted the German ships as a fleet in being. By 1918 the
US Navy yards were cranking out ships as good or better than the German
vessels.
A late war dreadnought such as the USS New Mexico was a real beast with
12x14" guns in 4 main turrets with a secondary armament of 14 5" guns.
More to the point they were much better suited to blue water use than
the German vessels which had been optimised for warfare in North Sea and
being mainly coal burners were something of a problem to replenish at sea.
The Washington Treaty in fact saw many of the prewar dreadnoughts
scrapped anyway, the bulk of the British Battle fleet at Jutland were
amongst them. In the case of the RN only the oil fired Revenge and QE
class were retained in front line service.
Jim Wilkins
Feb 19, 2021, 7:28:59 PM2/19/21
to
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:s0o1di$iul$1...@dont-email.me...
...In nine days the British, French and US
The allies on the other hand were now well equipped, had an integrated
command structure and were using all arms strategy coordinating attacks
by air land and sea. The Armistice arrived just in time to prevent a
major attack from RN aircraft carriers on German naval bases.
-----------------------------------------------------
By 1918 improving technology and experience in how to best use it permitted
effective combined-arms attacks over terrain less torn up than No Mans Land,
where only feet and tank treads could move. The leading innovator in this
was General Edmund Allenby, who had been sidelined to the Middle East after
the disastrous Somme assault, and had learned the lessons of that dismal
failure in which horse cavalry was supposed to break through cracks infantry
and artillery made in the German lines. Cavalry did get past the German
trenches but was ineffective against machine guns, however Lawrence of
Arabia had shown that armored cars with machine gun turrets could make such
a plan work, at least on ground not shattered by years of artillery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Armoured_Car
"The armoured cars were poorly suited to the muddy trench filled
battlefields of the Western Front, but were able to operate in the Near
East, so the squadron from France went to Egypt."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Megiddo_(1918)
"concentration, surprise, and speed were key elements in the blitzkrieg
warfare planned by Allenby."
WW2 picked up almost where WW1 had left off, with bolt action rifles, horse
transportation and biplanes for ground support. Rommel and Guderian were
ignoring orders when they used their motorized armored elements to dash
ahead of the plodding infantry and horse-drawn artillery and defeat the
British and French more by surprise and confusion than military might.
Guderian didn't have the artillery or infantry for a house-to-house fight in
Dunkirk.
...In nine days the British, French and US
forces crossed the Canal du Nord, broke through the Hindenburg Line and
took tens of thousands of prisoners and guns. This left what by now were
mobile motorised and armoured forces a clear run into Germany. ...
took tens of thousands of prisoners and guns. This left what by now were
The allies on the other hand were now well equipped, had an integrated
command structure and were using all arms strategy coordinating attacks
by air land and sea. The Armistice arrived just in time to prevent a
major attack from RN aircraft carriers on German naval bases.
By 1918 improving technology and experience in how to best use it permitted
effective combined-arms attacks over terrain less torn up than No Mans Land,
where only feet and tank treads could move. The leading innovator in this
was General Edmund Allenby, who had been sidelined to the Middle East after
the disastrous Somme assault, and had learned the lessons of that dismal
failure in which horse cavalry was supposed to break through cracks infantry
and artillery made in the German lines. Cavalry did get past the German
trenches but was ineffective against machine guns, however Lawrence of
Arabia had shown that armored cars with machine gun turrets could make such
a plan work, at least on ground not shattered by years of artillery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Armoured_Car
"The armoured cars were poorly suited to the muddy trench filled
battlefields of the Western Front, but were able to operate in the Near
East, so the squadron from France went to Egypt."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Megiddo_(1918)
"concentration, surprise, and speed were key elements in the blitzkrieg
warfare planned by Allenby."
WW2 picked up almost where WW1 had left off, with bolt action rifles, horse
transportation and biplanes for ground support. Rommel and Guderian were
ignoring orders when they used their motorized armored elements to dash
ahead of the plodding infantry and horse-drawn artillery and defeat the
British and French more by surprise and confusion than military might.
Guderian didn't have the artillery or infantry for a house-to-house fight in
Dunkirk.
SolomonW
Feb 20, 2021, 5:22:26 AM2/20/21
to
On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
A bit strong, they were allies.
> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
> It was Germany that
> sent Lenin to Russia !
weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
Jim Wilkins
Feb 20, 2021, 6:41:21 AM2/20/21
to
"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message news:s0pl49$n41$1...@dont-email.me...
... Guderian didn't have the artillery or infantry for a house-to-house
fight in
Dunkirk.
-----------------------
An example of the Dunkirk ground defense:
http://www.mgb-stuff.org.uk/harry/cassel.htm
"The general idea of holding Cassel was to make the place into a tank-proof
fortress."
"For the last, most critical days of the retreat, the five important roads
of which Cassel was the centre, had been denied to the enemy and secured to
its comrades by the courage of this doomed detachment."
... Guderian didn't have the artillery or infantry for a house-to-house
fight in
Dunkirk.
-----------------------
An example of the Dunkirk ground defense:
http://www.mgb-stuff.org.uk/harry/cassel.htm
"The general idea of holding Cassel was to make the place into a tank-proof
fortress."
"For the last, most critical days of the retreat, the five important roads
of which Cassel was the centre, had been denied to the enemy and secured to
its comrades by the courage of this doomed detachment."
Vincent
Feb 20, 2021, 9:20:11 PM2/20/21
to
On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>
>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>
>
> A bit strong, they were allies.
Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
>
> A bit strong, they were allies.
Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
>
>
>> It was Germany that
>> sent Lenin to Russia !
No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia. This
>
>> It was Germany that
>> sent Lenin to Russia !
occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to contaminate
the Russian leadership.
>
> They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
> weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
in Germany?
Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest you
wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring pictures
instead of wasting our time?
>
Geoffrey Sinclair
Feb 21, 2021, 5:19:00 AM2/21/21
to
"Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>
>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>
> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
> civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>
>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>
> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
> civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
>> A bit strong, they were allies.
>
> Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
> Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
war mode.
The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
a Bolshevik one.
The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
allow the invasion of southern Germany.
So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
>>> It was Germany that
>>> sent Lenin to Russia !
>
> No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
are not sending him service.
> This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
> contaminate the Russian leadership.
up in power.
>> They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
>> weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
>
> Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing in
> Germany?
into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
> Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest you
> wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring pictures
> instead of wasting our time?
one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
Vincent
Feb 21, 2021, 7:37:10 PM2/21/21
to
On 2/21/2021 4:18 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
> news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>>
>>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>>
>> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
>> civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>
> Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
> to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
> the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it
> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
> news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>>
>>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>>
>> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
>> civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>
> Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
> to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
> the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
happen. I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front
yard?
>
>>> A bit strong, they were allies.
>>
>> Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
>
> He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
>
>> Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
>
> The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
> collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
> around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
> and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
> leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
> war mode.
I am glad you are convinced that that was a one year war. Now if we can
>>> A bit strong, they were allies.
>>
>> Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
>
> He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
>
>> Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
>
> The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
> collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
> around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
> and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
> leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
> war mode.
only make the mess in the ME and elsewhere into just one year conflicts.
>
> The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
> the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
Your point?
> The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
> the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
>
> The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
> acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
> a Bolshevik one.
Wow. We have another fact shoved down the 1984 memory hole.
> The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
> acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
> a Bolshevik one.
>
> The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
> peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
> put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
> allow the invasion of southern Germany.
>
> So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
Are you kidding? Look it up. Like I said, Your education is lacking and
> The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
> peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
> put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
> allow the invasion of southern Germany.
>
> So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
I recommend helping yourself.
>
>>>> It was Germany that
>>>> sent Lenin to Russia !
>>
>> No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
>
> I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
> the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
> are not sending him service.
If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>>>> It was Germany that
>>>> sent Lenin to Russia !
>>
>> No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
>
> I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
> the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
> are not sending him service.
>
>> This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
>> contaminate the Russian leadership.
>
> Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
> up in power.
Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's. Some of our
>> This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
>> contaminate the Russian leadership.
>
> Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
> up in power.
greatest loses of secrets was through your establishments. Even the Jews
are touchy about what you are told.
>
>>> They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
>>> weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
I see. It was only a way way thing. Damn good thing the USA didn't allow
>>> They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
>>> weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
Germany to set up German language schools for you.
>>
>> Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing
>> in Germany?
Nope.
>> Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing
>> in Germany?
>
> Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
> into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
Perhaps you can show either or neither.
> Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
> into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
>
>> Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest
>> you wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring
>> pictures instead of wasting our time?
>
> The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
> one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
Is such were the case ...I am sure you would be incapable of any quality.
>> Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest
>> you wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring
>> pictures instead of wasting our time?
>
> The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
> one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
Geoffrey Sinclair
Feb 22, 2021, 4:09:16 AM2/22/21
to
"Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
news:s0uubh$i87$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 2/21/2021 4:18 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
>> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
>> news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>>>
>>> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
>>> civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>>
>> Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
>> to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
>> the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
>
> Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it happen.
Actually no. Feel free to provide the examples of the British selling
>> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
>> news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>>>
>>> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
>>> civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>>
>> Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
>> to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
>> the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
>
> Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it happen.
weapons to the Bolsheviks.
Feel free to provide examples of British money to the Bolsheviks.
The Russian government owed Britain about as much as Britain
owed the USA, the Bolsheviks repudiated the debts of the Russian
government which made it harder for the British to handle the
problems of the next 30 years.
> I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front yard?
Think of Vincent as someone who needs to keep changing the
subject when asked for proof.
>>>> A bit strong, they were allies.
>>>
>>> Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
>>
>> He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
>>
>>> Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
>>
>> The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
>> collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
>> around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
>> and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
>> leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
>> war mode.
>
> I am glad you are convinced that that was a one year war.
> Now if we can only make the mess in the ME and elsewhere into just one
> year conflicts.
>> The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
>> the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
>
> Your point?
>> The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
>> acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
>> a Bolshevik one.
>
> Wow. We have another fact shoved down the 1984 memory hole.
>> The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
>> peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
>> put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
>> allow the invasion of southern Germany.
>>
>> So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
>
> Are you kidding?
> Look it up.
I did.
> Like I said, Your education is lacking and I recommend helping yourself.
losing track of things, explains much.
>>>>> It was Germany that
>>>>> sent Lenin to Russia !
>>>
>>> No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
>>
>> I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
>> the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
>> are not sending him service.
>
> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Bolsheviks, were serving a purpose to the Germans, which of course
explains the money and weapons the Germans gave his movement.
Then add legitimacy by negotiating with them for the end of the war,
then popularity for ending the war and by reducing the size of Russia
made it easier for the Bolsheviks to consolidate power.
>>> This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
>>> contaminate the Russian leadership.
>>
>> Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
>> up in power.
>
> Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's.
> Some of our greatest loses of secrets was through your establishments.
> Even the Jews are touchy about what you are told.
>>>> They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
>>>> weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
> I see. It was only a way way thing.
weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
> Damn good thing the USA didn't allow Germany to set up German language
> schools for you.
Chinese.
>>> Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing
>>> in Germany?
> Nope.
Still trying to reply to stuff I never wrote, I see. The Germans gave the
Bolsheviks
money, weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
>> Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
>> into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
>
> Perhaps you can show either or neither.
>>> Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest you
>>> wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring pictures
>>> instead of wasting our time?
>>
>> The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
>> one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
>
> Is such were the case ...
> I am sure you would be incapable of any quality.
right (left?) track.
Keith Willshaw
Feb 22, 2021, 7:09:19 AM2/22/21
to
On 22/02/2021 00:37, Vincent wrote:
> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
In 1917 with the Feb revolution in Russia the Social Democrats took over
the Government and had the policy of continuing the war. In order to
disrupt this the German government agreed to permit 32 Russian citizens
to travel in a sealed train carriage through their territory, among them
Lenin and his wife.
Note the importance of it being a sealed train, they very much wanted to
avoid Lenin deciding to disembark in either Austro-Hungary or Germany.
The group travelled by train from Zürich to Sassnitz, proceeding by
ferry to Trelleborg, Sweden, and from there to the Haparanda–Tornio
border crossing and then to Helsinki before taking the final train to
Petrograd. Once there Lenin raised the expected hell which put the
Bolsheviks in power and Russia out of the war.
The unexpected side effect was to send a message to the Spartacists in
Germany that a left wing revolution against an unpopular regime could be
successful.
Jim Wilkins
Feb 22, 2021, 8:06:18 AM2/22/21
to
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:s106tc$hvl$1...@dont-email.me...
...
And the backlash to that Marxist uprising led to the socialist but fiercely
anti-Marxist Third Reich:
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/meet-freikorps-vanguard-terror-1918-1923
...
The unexpected side effect was to send a message to the Spartacists in
Germany that a left wing revolution against an unpopular regime could be
successful.
-------------------
Germany that a left wing revolution against an unpopular regime could be
successful.
And the backlash to that Marxist uprising led to the socialist but fiercely
anti-Marxist Third Reich:
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/meet-freikorps-vanguard-terror-1918-1923
Vincent
Feb 22, 2021, 9:13:38 PM2/22/21
to
On 2/22/2021 3:09 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
> news:s0uubh$i87$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On 2/21/2021 4:18 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
>>> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
>>> news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>>>>
>>>> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection
>>>> and civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>>>
>>> Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
>>> to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
>>> the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
>>
>> Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it
>> happen.
>
> Actually no. Feel free to provide the examples of the British selling
> weapons to the Bolsheviks.
Feel free to prove otherwise. The Brits sold weapons to anyone that
> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
> news:s0uubh$i87$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On 2/21/2021 4:18 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
>>> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
>>> news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>>>>
>>>> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection
>>>> and civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>>>
>>> Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
>>> to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
>>> the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
>>
>> Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it
>> happen.
>
> Actually no. Feel free to provide the examples of the British selling
> weapons to the Bolsheviks.
wanted them, as does USA, Russia et al.
>
> Feel free to provide examples of British money to the Bolsheviks.
There is an open book on that..Read it amnd stop the idiot responses.
> Feel free to provide examples of British money to the Bolsheviks.
>
> The Russian government owed Britain about as much as Britain
> owed the USA, the Bolsheviks repudiated the debts of the Russian
> government which made it harder for the British to handle the
> problems of the next 30 years.
Make up your fucking mind...
> The Russian government owed Britain about as much as Britain
> owed the USA, the Bolsheviks repudiated the debts of the Russian
> government which made it harder for the British to handle the
> problems of the next 30 years.
The Bolsheviks were Russians!
>
>> I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front yard?
>
> Still trying to get rid of yours?
If I had one, I definitely would give it to you. It would give you and
>> I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front yard?
>
> Still trying to get rid of yours?
your kind something to masturbate to.
>
> Think of Vincent as someone who needs to keep changing the
> subject when asked for proof.
any good News media has published it all a number of times.
>
>>>>> A bit strong, they were allies.
>>>>
>>>> Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
>>>
>>> He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
>>>
>>>> Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
>>>
>>> The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
>>> collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
>>> around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
>>> and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
>>> leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
>>> war mode.
>>
>> I am glad you are convinced that that was a one year war.
>
> Change of subject. August to November 1918 is one year?
us how to do that in the ME and elsewhere. Popcorn and coke timing for
wars could become quite popular.
>
>> Now if we can only make the mess in the ME and elsewhere into just one
>> year conflicts.
>
> Change of subject. Difficult given the definition of one year being used.
educate you.
>
>>> The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
>>> the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
>>
>> Your point?
>
> No troop movements home to counter Bolsheviks.
Could it be that you changed timelines to fit whatever tall story you
>>> The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
>>> the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
>>
>> Your point?
>
> No troop movements home to counter Bolsheviks.
are selling?
>
>>> The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
>>> acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
>>> a Bolshevik one.
>>
>> Wow. We have another fact shoved down the 1984 memory hole.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
>>> The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
>>> peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
>>> put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that would
>>> allow the invasion of southern Germany.
>>>
>>> So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
>>
>> Are you kidding?
>
> No.
>
>> Look it up.
>
> I did.
You are supposed to keep you mind and eyes open when researching. Try to
>> Look it up.
>
> I did.
do it right this time.
>
>> Like I said, Your education is lacking and I recommend helping yourself.
>
> Change of subject,. Vincent never said it to me, sounds like someone
> losing track of things, explains much.
>> Like I said, Your education is lacking and I recommend helping yourself.
>
> Change of subject,. Vincent never said it to me, sounds like someone
> losing track of things, explains much.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
>
>>>>>> It was Germany that
>>>>>> sent Lenin to Russia !
>>>>
>>>> No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
>>>
>>> I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
>>> the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
>>> are not sending him service.
>>
>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>
> Change of subject. But amusing this time, the admission Lenin, the
> Bolsheviks, were serving a purpose to the Germans, which of course
> explains the money and weapons the Germans gave his movement.
>>>>>> sent Lenin to Russia !
>>>>
>>>> No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
>>>
>>> I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
>>> the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
>>> are not sending him service.
>>
>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>
> Change of subject. But amusing this time, the admission Lenin, the
> Bolsheviks, were serving a purpose to the Germans, which of course
> explains the money and weapons the Germans gave his movement.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
>
> Then add legitimacy by negotiating with them for the end of the war,
> then popularity for ending the war and by reducing the size of Russia
> made it easier for the Bolsheviks to consolidate power.
> then popularity for ending the war and by reducing the size of Russia
> made it easier for the Bolsheviks to consolidate power.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
>
>>>> This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
>>>> contaminate the Russian leadership.
>>>
>>> Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
>>> up in power.
>>
>> Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's.
>
> Change of subject. As for pink, sunburn does that to many people.
Is that a code word for being a communist?
>>>> contaminate the Russian leadership.
>>>
>>> Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
>>> up in power.
>>
>> Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's.
>
> Change of subject. As for pink, sunburn does that to many people.
>
>> Some of our greatest loses of secrets was through your establishments.
>
> Change of subject. Anyway when did I take ownership of the establishments?
>
>> Even the Jews are touchy about what you are told.
>
> Change of subject but an interesting revelation of Vincent's prejudices.
>> Even the Jews are touchy about what you are told.
>
> Change of subject but an interesting revelation of Vincent's prejudices.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
>
>>>>> They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian revolutionaries
>>>>> weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
>
> Solomon wrote the above.
>
>> I see. It was only a way way thing.
>
> Change to incoherent subject. The Germans gave the Bolsheviks money,
> weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
>>>>> weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
>
> Solomon wrote the above.
>
>> I see. It was only a way way thing.
>
> Change to incoherent subject. The Germans gave the Bolsheviks money,
> weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
>
>> Damn good thing the USA didn't allow Germany to set up German language
>> schools for you.
>
> Change of subject, anyway it would be more useful these days to learn
> Chinese.
>> schools for you.
>
> Change of subject, anyway it would be more useful these days to learn
> Chinese.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
>
>>>> Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks
>>>> residing in Germany?
>
> Solomon wrote the above.
>
> > Nope.
>
> Still trying to reply to stuff I never wrote, I see. The Germans gave
> the Bolsheviks
> money, weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
There you go again.
>>>> residing in Germany?
>
> Solomon wrote the above.
>
> > Nope.
>
> Still trying to reply to stuff I never wrote, I see. The Germans gave
> the Bolsheviks
> money, weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
>
>>> Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
>>> into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
>>
>> Perhaps you can show either or neither.
>
> Vincent makes the claim, Vincent cannot back it up.
Th history backs it up and nothinbg backs up your prevarications. Do you
>>> Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
>>> into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
>>
>> Perhaps you can show either or neither.
>
> Vincent makes the claim, Vincent cannot back it up.
always make up things as you go?
>
>>>> Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest
>>>> you wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring
>>>> pictures instead of wasting our time?
>>>
>>> The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
>>> one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
>>
>> Is such were the case ...
>
> Is such were the case? It is being proved.
>>>> Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest
>>>> you wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring
>>>> pictures instead of wasting our time?
>>>
>>> The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
>>> one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
>>
>> Is such were the case ...
>
> Is such were the case? It is being proved.
Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
>
Vincent
Feb 22, 2021, 9:18:43 PM2/22/21
to
On 2/22/2021 6:09 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
> On 22/02/2021 00:37, Vincent wrote:
>
>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>
> Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
> Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
> On 22/02/2021 00:37, Vincent wrote:
>
>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>
> Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
> Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
Even Charlie Chaplin!
>
> In 1917 with the Feb revolution in Russia the Social Democrats took over
> the Government and had the policy of continuing the war. In order to
> disrupt this the German government agreed to permit 32 Russian citizens
> to travel in a sealed train carriage through their territory, among them
> Lenin and his wife.
>
> Note the importance of it being a sealed train, they very much wanted to
> avoid Lenin deciding to disembark in either Austro-Hungary or Germany.
>
> The group travelled by train from Zürich to Sassnitz, proceeding by
> ferry to Trelleborg, Sweden, and from there to the Haparanda–Tornio
> border crossing and then to Helsinki before taking the final train to
> Petrograd. Once there Lenin raised the expected hell which put the
> Bolsheviks in power and Russia out of the war.
>
> The unexpected side effect was to send a message to the Spartacists in
> Germany that a left wing revolution against an unpopular regime could be
> successful.
Now this I can agree with.
> In 1917 with the Feb revolution in Russia the Social Democrats took over
> the Government and had the policy of continuing the war. In order to
> disrupt this the German government agreed to permit 32 Russian citizens
> to travel in a sealed train carriage through their territory, among them
> Lenin and his wife.
>
> Note the importance of it being a sealed train, they very much wanted to
> avoid Lenin deciding to disembark in either Austro-Hungary or Germany.
>
> The group travelled by train from Zürich to Sassnitz, proceeding by
> ferry to Trelleborg, Sweden, and from there to the Haparanda–Tornio
> border crossing and then to Helsinki before taking the final train to
> Petrograd. Once there Lenin raised the expected hell which put the
> Bolsheviks in power and Russia out of the war.
>
> The unexpected side effect was to send a message to the Spartacists in
> Germany that a left wing revolution against an unpopular regime could be
> successful.
Geoffrey Sinclair
Feb 23, 2021, 3:06:37 AM2/23/21
to
"Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
news:s11ocg$2t6$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 2/22/2021 3:09 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
>> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
>> news:s0uubh$i87$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 2/21/2021 4:18 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
>>>> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>>>>>
>>>>> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
>>>>> civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
>>>> to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
>>>> the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
>>>
>>> Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it
>>> happen.
>>
>> Actually no. Feel free to provide the examples of the British selling
>> weapons to the Bolsheviks.
>
> Feel free to prove otherwise.
Easy, no evidence has been provided to show weapons sales by
>> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
>> news:s0uubh$i87$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 2/21/2021 4:18 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
>>>> "Vincent" <Vi...@Letuci.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:s0sg0q$6at$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>> On 2/20/2021 4:22 AM, SolomonW wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:46:26 +0000, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As for the Bolsheviks they were a German creation.
>>>>>
>>>>> They showed up in just about every country to foment insurrection and
>>>>> civil wars. Much like they did in Russian Revolution.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently the fact they showed up in lots of countries is an answer
>>>> to who created them. And gave a lot of help to put them in power in
>>>> the USSR which gave them a base to provide resources to others.
>>>
>>> Actually England produced much of the weaponry and geld to make it
>>> happen.
>>
>> Actually no. Feel free to provide the examples of the British selling
>> weapons to the Bolsheviks.
>
> Feel free to prove otherwise.
Britain to the Bolsheviks during and just after WWI. The British sold
weapons to Russia, not the Bolsheviks and sent an expeditionary
force in 1919 against the Bolsheviks.
> The Brits sold weapons to anyone that wanted them, as does USA, Russia et
> al.
When it comes to Germany there us plenty of evidence of support for
the Bolsheviks.
https://www.dw.com/en/how-germany-got-the-russian-revolution-off-the-ground/a-41195312
For a quick introduction.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2625787?seq=1
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/opinion/was-lenin-a-german-agent.html
https://medium.com/history-of-yesterday/when-germany-funded-the-russian-revolution-428d369f27ff
>> Feel free to provide examples of British money to the Bolsheviks.
>
> There is an open book on that..Read it amnd stop the idiot responses.
>> The Russian government owed Britain about as much as Britain
>> owed the USA, the Bolsheviks repudiated the debts of the Russian
>> government which made it harder for the British to handle the
>> problems of the next 30 years.
>
> Make up your fucking mind...
> The Bolsheviks were Russians!
money to. Then the Bolsheviks took over, it is in all the history books,
the new government changed a lot of the rules. You may want to read
up on what happened.
Vincent, groups like Antifa and Proud Boys are Americans, however there
are significant differences.
>>> I wonder that you don't have a Statue of Karl Marx in your front yard?
>>
>> Still trying to get rid of yours?
>
> If I had one, I definitely would give it to you.
needs some new decor.
> It would give you and your kind something to masturbate to.
>> Think of Vincent as someone who needs to keep changing the
>> subject when asked for proof.
>
> Think of GS as too damned lazy to do his own homework. The Archives of any
> good News media has published it all a number of times.
>>>>>> A bit strong, they were allies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope! Smoking that stuff has addled you.
>>>>
>>>> He says indistinctly, through a rather large aromatic smoke cloud.
>>>>
>>>>> Germany sent troops home in WWI to put down the Bolshevik revolution.
>>>>
>>>> The German army performance on 8 August 1918 with 6 divisions
>>>> collapsing, the Hindenburg line was pushed through by end September,
>>>> around the same time as the Allied Army of the Orient broke through
>>>> and Bulgaria sued for peace and it was clear Turkey was going to
>>>> leave the war. So the German leadership moved to get out of the
>>>> war mode.
>>>
>>> I am glad you are convinced that that was a one year war.
>>
>> Change of subject. August to November 1918 is one year?
>
> So you are claiming a several month war.
project it onto others.
> If that is true, why not show us how to do that in the ME and elsewhere.
> Popcorn and coke timing for wars could become quite popular.
>>> Now if we can only make the mess in the ME and elsewhere into just one
>>> year conflicts.
>>
>> Change of subject. Difficult given the definition of one year being used.
>
> Do try to keep up. I bet your folks were beside themselves trying to
> educate you.
your education experiences out of things. I note the cut and paste of my
text, keep that up, repeating words is a step to understanding.
>>>> The German system fell to pieces from October 1918 and had to end
>>>> the war, the troops were ordered home as part of the armistice.
>>>
>>> Your point?
>>
>> No troop movements home to counter Bolsheviks.
>
> Could it be that you changed timelines to fit whatever tall story you are
> selling?
others. It avoids providing evidence.
>>>> The fleet mutinies of 28 and 29 October for example and other
>>>> acts are generally considered parts of a revolt, but not necessarily
>>>> a Bolshevik one.
>>>
>>> Wow. We have another fact shoved down the 1984 memory hole.
>>
>> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>>>> The Austro Hungarians told the Germans they were going to sue for
>>>> peace on 27 October, and did so on 3 November, part of that treaty
>>>> put their road and rail system at the disposal of the allies, that
>>>> would
>>>> allow the invasion of southern Germany.
>>>>
>>>> So when were the troop sent home to deal with revolution?
>>>
>>> Are you kidding?
>>
>> No.
>
> Then you are prevaricating!
proof for Vincent.
>>> Look it up.
>>
>> I did.
>
> You are supposed to keep you mind and eyes open when researching. Try to
> do it right this time.
>>> Like I said, Your education is lacking and I recommend helping yourself.
>>
>> Change of subject,. Vincent never said it to me, sounds like someone
>> losing track of things, explains much.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>>>>>>> It was Germany that
>>>>>>> sent Lenin to Russia !
>>>>>
>>>>> No.. They allowed the train with Lenin aboard to pass into Russia.
>>>>
>>>> I see, allowing the train to pass is not the same as sending, providing
>>>> the security and keeping Lenin in a sealed carriage all part of the we
>>>> are not sending him service.
>>>
>>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>>
>> Change of subject. But amusing this time, the admission Lenin, the
>> Bolsheviks, were serving a purpose to the Germans, which of course
>> explains the money and weapons the Germans gave his movement.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>> Then add legitimacy by negotiating with them for the end of the war,
>> then popularity for ending the war and by reducing the size of Russia
>> made it easier for the Bolsheviks to consolidate power.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>>>>> This occurred while fighting the Russians. It was a chess move to
>>>>> contaminate the Russian leadership.
>>>>
>>>> Ah necessity strikes again, but it is everyone else's fault Lenin ended
>>>> up in power.
>>>
>>> Why not Much of your Homeland is dusted with pinko's.
>>
>> Change of subject. As for pink, sunburn does that to many people.
>
> Is that a code word for being a communist?
>>> Some of our greatest loses of secrets was through your establishments.
>>
>> Change of subject. Anyway when did I take ownership of the
>> establishments?
>
> When did you abandon your establishment cell?
to assume anyone else is.
>>> Even the Jews are touchy about what you are told.
>>
>> Change of subject but an interesting revelation of Vincent's prejudices.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>>>>>> They did much more then that the Germans, gave Russian
>>>>>> revolutionaries
>>>>>> weapons and gave them a lot of money to weaken the Russians
>>
>> Solomon wrote the above.
>>
>>> I see. It was only a way way thing.
>>
>> Change to incoherent subject. The Germans gave the Bolsheviks money,
>> weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
>>> Damn good thing the USA didn't allow Germany to set up German language
>>> schools for you.
>>
>> Change of subject, anyway it would be more useful these days to learn
>> Chinese.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
limit of Vincent's skills.
>>>>> Is that not the same thing the Russians did to the Bolsheviks residing
>>>>> in Germany?
>>
>> Solomon wrote the above.
>>
>> > Nope.
>>
>> Still trying to reply to stuff I never wrote, I see. The Germans gave the
>> Bolsheviks money, weapons, legitimacy and popularity.
>
> There you go again.
>>>> Perhaps you can show the 1917 and 1918 weapons shipments from Russia
>>>> into Germany versus the ones from Germany to Lenin's people.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you can show either or neither.
>>
>> Vincent makes the claim, Vincent cannot back it up.
>
> Th history backs it up and nothinbg backs up your prevarications. Do you
> always make up things as you go?
has a make believe world and projects it onto others.
>>>>> Solomon, You are very poorly educated on this subject. May I suggest
>>>>> you wander down to the Kindergarten classroom and take up coloring
>>>>> pictures instead of wasting our time?
>>>>
>>>> The idea being to bring some pictures back for you in the hope that
>>>> one day you will qualify for Kindergarten?
>>>
>>> Is such were the case ...
>>
>> Is such were the case? It is being proved.
>
> Change of subject. Inconvenient facts need to be ignored.
breakthrough.
a425couple
Feb 23, 2021, 11:17:43 AM2/23/21
to
On 2/18/2021 1:15 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
> On 17/02/2021 01:28, SolomonW wrote:
>
>>
>> War is not just an accounting exercise.
>>
>> The importance to the NAZI
>> leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
>> (although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the
>> people
>> they were fighting back.
>>
>> You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
>> with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
>>
>
> You may notice a pattern developing here, ---
> On 17/02/2021 01:28, SolomonW wrote:
>
>>
>> War is not just an accounting exercise.
>>
>> The importance to the NAZI
>> leadership and people of the V weapons was not the damage they did
>> (although cost/benefit of the V1 was very impressive) but showed the
>> people
>> they were fighting back.
>>
>> You can see the same idea in the first Gulf War
>> with the Iraqi rocket attacks on Israel and Saudi Arabia.
>>
>
>
> When you look at the nuclear program the Germans fatally damaged it by
> splitting the limited resources available across multiple teams. There
> was just about enough heavy water for one reactor but not enough for
> two. The prototype they built at Haigerloch in 1945 was hopeless, There
> was not enough nuclear fuel or heavy water to achieve criticality and it
> had no control rods ! They intended to control it by varying the level
> of heavy water in the pile.
>
Interesting.
> When you look at the nuclear program the Germans fatally damaged it by
> splitting the limited resources available across multiple teams. There
> was just about enough heavy water for one reactor but not enough for
> two. The prototype they built at Haigerloch in 1945 was hopeless, There
> was not enough nuclear fuel or heavy water to achieve criticality and it
> had no control rods ! They intended to control it by varying the level
> of heavy water in the pile.
>
In the Turtledove novel, The Germans got some of the
uranium from a destroyed 'Lizard' A bomb, and then
in doing their research & development, failed to
safely control it and 'cooked' all their 'experts' in
a runaway reaction.
Jim Wilkins
Feb 23, 2021, 11:56:06 AM2/23/21
to
"a425couple" wrote in message news:s139q...@news2.newsguy.com...
Interesting.
In the Turtledove novel, The Germans got some of the
uranium from a destroyed 'Lizard' A bomb, and then
in doing their research & development, failed to
safely control it and 'cooked' all their 'experts' in
a runaway reaction.
------------------------------
That's plausible because they didn't provide for delayed neutrons.
In reality Hitler applied his standard technique of dividing responsibility
and making the parties compete for power, resources and his favor, survival
of the fittest. This seriously crippled them when available resources were
inadequate, for example nickel, tungsten, uranium and heavy water.
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=176230
Interesting.
In the Turtledove novel, The Germans got some of the
uranium from a destroyed 'Lizard' A bomb, and then
in doing their research & development, failed to
safely control it and 'cooked' all their 'experts' in
a runaway reaction.
That's plausible because they didn't provide for delayed neutrons.
In reality Hitler applied his standard technique of dividing responsibility
and making the parties compete for power, resources and his favor, survival
of the fittest. This seriously crippled them when available resources were
inadequate, for example nickel, tungsten, uranium and heavy water.
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=176230
Keith Willshaw
Feb 23, 2021, 8:09:54 PM2/23/21
to
On 23/02/2021 02:18, Vincent wrote:
> On 2/22/2021 6:09 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>> On 22/02/2021 00:37, Vincent wrote:
>>
>>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>>
>> Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
>> Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
>
> Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
> Even Charlie Chaplin!
YOU are the one who claimed the Germans would hve executed him - Doh !
> On 2/22/2021 6:09 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>> On 22/02/2021 00:37, Vincent wrote:
>>
>>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>>
>> Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
>> Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
>
> Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
> Even Charlie Chaplin!
In 1918 Charlie Chaplin was making films in the USA for First National.
He moved to Switzerland in 1953 after his US rentry permit was removed
on political grounds. McCarthyism ruled, freedom of speech and democracy
were not protected if you were considered left wing. A shameful period
for the USA but a boost for Europe as we got many top US Artists
settling over here in France, the UK and Switzerland.
Vincent
Feb 23, 2021, 11:21:52 PM2/23/21
to
On 2/23/2021 2:06 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair wrote:
Yaaaawn... You are way too much like Rudy and his other puppets.
Yaaaawn... You are way too much like Rudy and his other puppets.
Vincent
Feb 23, 2021, 11:57:11 PM2/23/21
to
On 2/23/2021 7:09 PM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
> On 23/02/2021 02:18, Vincent wrote:
>> On 2/22/2021 6:09 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>> On 22/02/2021 00:37, Vincent wrote:
>>>
>>>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>>>
>>> Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
>>> Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
>>
>> Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
>> Even Charlie Chaplin!
>
>
> YOU are the one who claimed the Germans would hve executed him - Doh !
Germany would very likely would have executed him. Switzerland is NOT
> On 23/02/2021 02:18, Vincent wrote:
>> On 2/22/2021 6:09 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
>>> On 22/02/2021 00:37, Vincent wrote:
>>>
>>>> If Lenin wasn't serving a purpose, the Germans would have executed him.
>>>
>>> Given that Lenin was expelled from Austro Hungary and lived in
>>> Switzerland until 1917 thus is unlikely.
>>
>> Switzerland is NOT Germany. Everybody was hiding out in Switzerland.
>> Even Charlie Chaplin!
>
>
> YOU are the one who claimed the Germans would hve executed him - Doh !
Germany and is definitely a neutral country that is safe haven for about
anyone that will abide by Swiss law. Even the International Congress of
Jews almost got expelled by declaring war on Germany from Neutral
Switzerland.
>
> In 1918 Charlie Chaplin was making films in the USA for First National.
In what way does that keep him from moving to Switzerland?
> In 1918 Charlie Chaplin was making films in the USA for First National.
>
> He moved to Switzerland in 1953 after his US rentry permit was removed
> on political grounds. McCarthyism ruled,
Actually Wisconsin Senator McCarthy has been proven correct over the
> He moved to Switzerland in 1953 after his US rentry permit was removed
> on political grounds. McCarthyism ruled,
decades. Good old Jolly England could use a fellow like him. Richard
Nixon was part of the UN-American activities committee. Did you forget
that at that time we were fighting a Police action against Communist
North Korea, Communist China and against Communist Russia in the air
war? I do believe that was a UN action in which your country et al were
involved.
freedom of speech and democracy
> were not protected if you were considered left wing.
left. Shooting the bastards was a badge of honor for our great nation.
We should have gotten George Bush in those purges. First Prescott Bush
dealt with the Nazi's selling them submarine fuel, Then Jr runs a
perfectly good airplane out of fuel without firing shot and gets a
medal, Also ends up running the CIA during its worst Productions. then
the SOB invents the "Homeland Security" which lords it over the other 17
agencies. Of course Homeland Security is in the hands of the Marxist
Democrat Swamp. The same folks that have allowed the massive security
intrusions to every American Military body and damned near every
Civilian enterprise. Lots more of the Marxist assholes in both our
Governments. Harry Truman invented the NSA to curb the Roosevelt
OSS/CIA. Reagan invented the NSI...They keep inventing more agencies to
stop the corruption in the already operating agencies. Whatta Joke.
A shameful period
> for the USA but a boost for Europe
mess, but you folks make us look like amateurs when it comes to a mess.
By the way...DON"T call us for your next fucked up war.
as we got many top US Artists
> settling over here in France, the UK and Switzerland.
You got the OFFAL of our entertainment industry.
a425couple
Mar 30, 2021, 11:41:07 AM3/30/21
to
On 2/14/2021 11:09 AM, a425couple wrote:
> Some interesting reminders here:
>
> from
> https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
>
> James Welch, lives in Orange County, CA (2008-present)
> Answered February 7
> Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
> own nuclear weapons?
> Not close at all.
>
> Neither Japan nor Germany had the following:
>
> A team of scientists—nuclear physicists, chemists, mathematicians,
> explosive experts, and others—who, just from knowing about uranium
> fission, could work out how to make a nuclear bomb. Hell, they didn’t
> even get a working reactor!
>
> The funds to make this possible. Remember, it took $2,000,000,000 1945
> American dollars to build the first 4 nukes (Trinity, Little Boy, Fat
> Man, and “the demon core”).
> Big snip -----
A different Quora that is interesting ---
Neal Scroggs
Mon
A Most Viewed Writer on World War II.
Were the German attempts at an atomic weapon during WW2 deliberately
foiled? If so, by who?
Werner Heisenberg, the lead scientist in Germany’s uranium studies met
with Niels Bohr in Copenhagen in 1941. Denmark was under Nazi occupation
and Bohr, a scientist with Jewish heritage, was himself under Gestapo
surveillance. The two men held their meeting in a public park as far
from listening ears as possible.
The subject of their conversation remained secret until 2002 when the
Bohr family released several unsent letters from Bohr to Heisenberg
which referenced their 1941 meeting. The letters reveal Bohr’s
interpretation of their discussion. He believed that Heisenberg had come
to Denmark to enlist Bohr’s aid in his research. Bohr wrote about
Heisenberg’s boasting about Germany’s inevitable victory and his own
ability to build a weapon based on nuclear fission. If those letters are
accurate and Bohr’s opinion about Heisenberg’s motives for that 1941
meeting is trustworthy, it means that Heisenberg’s postwar interviews
with American physicists connected with the Manhattan Project consisted
of several lies and obfuscations.
Heisenburg was one of many German scientists and technicians rounded up
in Operation Paperclip. The Americans were interested in learning as
much as possible about German efforts to create an atomic bomb, and how
valuable their work and knowledge might be to Stalin. Heisenberg told
the Americans that he never seriously worked on the National Socialist
Bomb, that his research was intended to deceive Nazi authorities into
believing that progress toward a weapon was being made.
When the Manhatten Project scientist studied Heisenberg’s notes it
became clear that his estimation of the critical mass of U-235 was too
great by a factor of ten. This meant that if the German reactor located
in Haigerloch, a small town in the Swabian Alps, had ever been allowed
to power up to what was deemed to be its maximum safe output, the
contraption would have exploded, killing everyone for hundreds of meters
around, and would have created a mini-Chernobyl in southwestern Germany.
According to the postwar interview transcript, Heisenberg never
indicated that he knew his criticality computations were faulty. It is
not inconsistent that Heisenberg’s claim that his efforts to build a
Nazi Bomb were a shame and that he could be unaware of his potentially
disastrous reactor design. Both could be true. However, the Bohr letters
strongly suggest Werner Heisenberg was being deceptive when he claimed
his experiments were intended to mollify Hitler regarding his demand for
an ultimate weapon rather than actually creating one.
11.1K views65 upvotes2 shares5 comments
2.3K viewsView 23 upvotes
Gavin Tabor
9h ago
For an interesting take on this, go and see the play ‘Copenhagen ‘ by
Freyn (IIRC). There is a TV adaptation of this. Its a dramatisation of
the events surrounding Bohr and Heisenbergs meeting and speculation
about Heisenbergs true motives.
Lloyd Willey
12h ago
Nice. Interesting tale. One might be tempted to think Heisenberg wanted
a cover story in case Bohr was, shall we say, examined, by the Gestapo.
I bet he wished he’d thought of that. We’ll never know the true story, I
suspect.
Kevin Bryant
16h ago
What an extremely interesting answer.
Hat tip to you
Neal Scroggs
13h ago
Thank you. I apologize for the numerous typos. Sometimes it takes
several hours before I can see my errors. I think I’ve corrected them all.
ALSO
Mats Andersson, Visted 24 European countries
Answered March 24
In a way, yes.
They were foiled by the Nazi way of creating organisations.
The Nazis were fundamentally unable to organise something like the
Manhattan Project. Their way of doing things was to create two
organisations that had to fight each other; this ensured that no one
could get powerful enough to challenge the level above.
This is fundamental to the Leadership Principle, which was the leading
management theory at the time—a bit like ISO of the 1930s. The basic
idea is that every decision should be taken at the appropriate level,
and those at lower levels should never question or challenge an
instruction from above, since this is simply inefficient. And the lower
levels should also be subject to competition from within the
organisation; the competition would keep them efficient. (Many US
companies are actually still run this way.)
It is better known under the German name, the Führerprinzip.
It doesn’t work.
They did keep a number of German physicists and others who were involved
in the German nuclear program in a house with hidden cameras for a few
months, from the German surrender and until a bit after the Japanese
surrender, and they all agreed that Nazi Germany would have been
completely organisationally incompetent to make a nuclear weapon.
It is also quite certain that some of those involved didn’t do their
best job ever on this project. Niels Bohr, Danish Nobel Prize laureate
who was drafted into the project, is often mentioned. It has never been
established whether he deliberately failed, or whether he was simply
seriously unenthusiastic, but it remains a fact that the work he did on
the German nuclear program was definitely not up to his usual standards.
It was extraordinarily slow and contained errors.
ALSO
Richard Hardy, MSc. from University of Manchester (1977)
Answered March 25
I think that the Norwegian Heavy-Water pathway was a sideshow that
wasted many Norwegian civilians’ lives.
Werner Heisenberg - Nobel prize winner and put in charge of building a
nuclear bomb for Germany - told Hitler that such a bomb would need a ton
weight of Uranium 235. The Actual amount was a pound weight/about 1/2Kg.
After the war Heisenberg wrote a book saying that he deliberately made
the miscalculation - it was a schoolchild level mistake.But not every
nuclear scientist who knew him, believed him.
Several Ironies: Hitler was sitting on huge deposits of Uranium in
Czechoslovakia;he had expelled most of his best nuclear scientists
because they were Jews, who went to America and actually succeeded in
building the bombs - but not in time to use on Germany;the Americans had
some, but not enough uranium.So had the Germans.At the end of the WW2
Hitler ordered a new larger and longer distance U boat to take German
high technology inventions to Japan.Admiral Doenitz succeeded Hitler and
ordered all German vessels on the high seas to surrender.On board the
special U boat were two Japanese scientists who then went to their bunks
to lie down and take Lethal pills. The German Captain saw a British
warship through his periscope, but hated the idea of surrendering to the
British. Then he saw a Canadian warship, so he surfaced and
surrendered.At the Canadian port (I think it was Halifax) the Canadians
were going through the U boat’s cargo when they found the German
uranium- which was more than the Americans had.
When the German Uranium was added to the amount that the Americans had,
it was enough to build the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. The bomb
that was dropped on Nagasaki was a completely different type of Nuclear
bomb made from Plutonium.
118 viewsView 1 upvote · Answer requested by Scott Webb
Philip Gardocki
Mon
Are you saying the Hiroshima bomb, was built using German Uranium? Is
there a source for this?
> Some interesting reminders here:
>
> from
> https://www.quora.com/How-close-were-Germany-and-Japan-to-developing-their-own-nuclear-weapons
>
> James Welch, lives in Orange County, CA (2008-present)
> Answered February 7
> Originally Answered: How close was Germany and Japan to develope their
> own nuclear weapons?
> Not close at all.
>
> Neither Japan nor Germany had the following:
>
> A team of scientists—nuclear physicists, chemists, mathematicians,
> explosive experts, and others—who, just from knowing about uranium
> fission, could work out how to make a nuclear bomb. Hell, they didn’t
> even get a working reactor!
>
> The funds to make this possible. Remember, it took $2,000,000,000 1945
> American dollars to build the first 4 nukes (Trinity, Little Boy, Fat
> Man, and “the demon core”).
> Big snip -----
A different Quora that is interesting ---
Neal Scroggs
Mon
A Most Viewed Writer on World War II.
Were the German attempts at an atomic weapon during WW2 deliberately
foiled? If so, by who?
Werner Heisenberg, the lead scientist in Germany’s uranium studies met
with Niels Bohr in Copenhagen in 1941. Denmark was under Nazi occupation
and Bohr, a scientist with Jewish heritage, was himself under Gestapo
surveillance. The two men held their meeting in a public park as far
from listening ears as possible.
The subject of their conversation remained secret until 2002 when the
Bohr family released several unsent letters from Bohr to Heisenberg
which referenced their 1941 meeting. The letters reveal Bohr’s
interpretation of their discussion. He believed that Heisenberg had come
to Denmark to enlist Bohr’s aid in his research. Bohr wrote about
Heisenberg’s boasting about Germany’s inevitable victory and his own
ability to build a weapon based on nuclear fission. If those letters are
accurate and Bohr’s opinion about Heisenberg’s motives for that 1941
meeting is trustworthy, it means that Heisenberg’s postwar interviews
with American physicists connected with the Manhattan Project consisted
of several lies and obfuscations.
Heisenburg was one of many German scientists and technicians rounded up
in Operation Paperclip. The Americans were interested in learning as
much as possible about German efforts to create an atomic bomb, and how
valuable their work and knowledge might be to Stalin. Heisenberg told
the Americans that he never seriously worked on the National Socialist
Bomb, that his research was intended to deceive Nazi authorities into
believing that progress toward a weapon was being made.
When the Manhatten Project scientist studied Heisenberg’s notes it
became clear that his estimation of the critical mass of U-235 was too
great by a factor of ten. This meant that if the German reactor located
in Haigerloch, a small town in the Swabian Alps, had ever been allowed
to power up to what was deemed to be its maximum safe output, the
contraption would have exploded, killing everyone for hundreds of meters
around, and would have created a mini-Chernobyl in southwestern Germany.
According to the postwar interview transcript, Heisenberg never
indicated that he knew his criticality computations were faulty. It is
not inconsistent that Heisenberg’s claim that his efforts to build a
Nazi Bomb were a shame and that he could be unaware of his potentially
disastrous reactor design. Both could be true. However, the Bohr letters
strongly suggest Werner Heisenberg was being deceptive when he claimed
his experiments were intended to mollify Hitler regarding his demand for
an ultimate weapon rather than actually creating one.
11.1K views65 upvotes2 shares5 comments
2.3K viewsView 23 upvotes
Gavin Tabor
9h ago
For an interesting take on this, go and see the play ‘Copenhagen ‘ by
Freyn (IIRC). There is a TV adaptation of this. Its a dramatisation of
the events surrounding Bohr and Heisenbergs meeting and speculation
about Heisenbergs true motives.
Lloyd Willey
12h ago
Nice. Interesting tale. One might be tempted to think Heisenberg wanted
a cover story in case Bohr was, shall we say, examined, by the Gestapo.
I bet he wished he’d thought of that. We’ll never know the true story, I
suspect.
Kevin Bryant
16h ago
What an extremely interesting answer.
Hat tip to you
Neal Scroggs
13h ago
Thank you. I apologize for the numerous typos. Sometimes it takes
several hours before I can see my errors. I think I’ve corrected them all.
ALSO
Mats Andersson, Visted 24 European countries
Answered March 24
In a way, yes.
They were foiled by the Nazi way of creating organisations.
The Nazis were fundamentally unable to organise something like the
Manhattan Project. Their way of doing things was to create two
organisations that had to fight each other; this ensured that no one
could get powerful enough to challenge the level above.
This is fundamental to the Leadership Principle, which was the leading
management theory at the time—a bit like ISO of the 1930s. The basic
idea is that every decision should be taken at the appropriate level,
and those at lower levels should never question or challenge an
instruction from above, since this is simply inefficient. And the lower
levels should also be subject to competition from within the
organisation; the competition would keep them efficient. (Many US
companies are actually still run this way.)
It is better known under the German name, the Führerprinzip.
It doesn’t work.
They did keep a number of German physicists and others who were involved
in the German nuclear program in a house with hidden cameras for a few
months, from the German surrender and until a bit after the Japanese
surrender, and they all agreed that Nazi Germany would have been
completely organisationally incompetent to make a nuclear weapon.
It is also quite certain that some of those involved didn’t do their
best job ever on this project. Niels Bohr, Danish Nobel Prize laureate
who was drafted into the project, is often mentioned. It has never been
established whether he deliberately failed, or whether he was simply
seriously unenthusiastic, but it remains a fact that the work he did on
the German nuclear program was definitely not up to his usual standards.
It was extraordinarily slow and contained errors.
ALSO
Richard Hardy, MSc. from University of Manchester (1977)
Answered March 25
I think that the Norwegian Heavy-Water pathway was a sideshow that
wasted many Norwegian civilians’ lives.
Werner Heisenberg - Nobel prize winner and put in charge of building a
nuclear bomb for Germany - told Hitler that such a bomb would need a ton
weight of Uranium 235. The Actual amount was a pound weight/about 1/2Kg.
After the war Heisenberg wrote a book saying that he deliberately made
the miscalculation - it was a schoolchild level mistake.But not every
nuclear scientist who knew him, believed him.
Several Ironies: Hitler was sitting on huge deposits of Uranium in
Czechoslovakia;he had expelled most of his best nuclear scientists
because they were Jews, who went to America and actually succeeded in
building the bombs - but not in time to use on Germany;the Americans had
some, but not enough uranium.So had the Germans.At the end of the WW2
Hitler ordered a new larger and longer distance U boat to take German
high technology inventions to Japan.Admiral Doenitz succeeded Hitler and
ordered all German vessels on the high seas to surrender.On board the
special U boat were two Japanese scientists who then went to their bunks
to lie down and take Lethal pills. The German Captain saw a British
warship through his periscope, but hated the idea of surrendering to the
British. Then he saw a Canadian warship, so he surfaced and
surrendered.At the Canadian port (I think it was Halifax) the Canadians
were going through the U boat’s cargo when they found the German
uranium- which was more than the Americans had.
When the German Uranium was added to the amount that the Americans had,
it was enough to build the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. The bomb
that was dropped on Nagasaki was a completely different type of Nuclear
bomb made from Plutonium.
118 viewsView 1 upvote · Answer requested by Scott Webb
Philip Gardocki
Mon
Are you saying the Hiroshima bomb, was built using German Uranium? Is
there a source for this?
Keith Willshaw
Apr 1, 2021, 3:23:51 AM4/1/21
to
small measure down to the crazy duplication of the project. Essentially
2 teams were selected to go ahead. The Germans had huge stockpiles of
uranium but from the Belgian radium works but had failed to build a
graphite moderated reactor as they used impure graphite that absorbed
too many neutrons. They had just about enough heavy water for one
working reactor but it was split between two rival groups. The
Haigerloch reactor could never have gone critical which is just as well
as the rudimentary control rods would likely have failed to maintain a
safe state.
Another group did try to produce U235 using the centrifuge system but it
never produced more than a few grams of slightly enriched uranium. It
took immense resources.
Its just possible they could have built one uranium bomb eventually but
far too late in the real world. The Red Army was on its way and boy were
they pissed.
Jim Wilkins
Apr 1, 2021, 5:17:43 PM4/1/21
to
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:s43se6$25s$1...@dont-email.me...
----------------------------
https://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/31/us/captured-cargo-captivating-mystery.html
The weights indicate that the Uranium had not been enriched.
Maybe Nazi Uranium went into the Demon Core?
https://www.sciencealert.com/the-chilling-story-of-the-demon-core-and-the-scientists-who-became-its-victims-plutonium-bomb-radiation-wwii
https://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/31/us/captured-cargo-captivating-mystery.html
The weights indicate that the Uranium had not been enriched.
Maybe Nazi Uranium went into the Demon Core?
https://www.sciencealert.com/the-chilling-story-of-the-demon-core-and-the-scientists-who-became-its-victims-plutonium-bomb-radiation-wwii
0 new messages