Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Curtis Lemay is missing the point by seeing the Axis and Allies as two definitive blocks. And China and Japan are just one example. So Japan agree to send a couple of ships to the Atlantic and a couple of brigades to Egypt (whoop whoop) in return for what? Britain will at best be expected to stop aiding China. So Britain is now potentially creating yet another enemy in the Chinese.... Great, a bankrupt empire can't have enough enemies can they?

Are you saying that if neutral Japan seeks to become a member of the Allies they would be turned down? Any instance of that sort of refusal elsewhere? Clearly, the USSR was accepted. Once a member, their actions reflect on the Alliance.

But what of the USSR? Apparently Stalin is happy to attack China (which of course aids Japan and does nothing for the USSR) despite the fact that the Soviets are fighting the Germans without the benefit of Lend Lease and indeed the Germans are getting help from the US. So what forces does Stalin use against China exactly???? And why help the Japanese (even if they could) who the Soviets detest?

Again, a Repulican administration might see the combo of Communism and Japan as worse than the Axis. Who knows how little would be necessary to trigger war with the USSR under that circumstance?

The USSR did not become a member of the Allies. Can you comprehend that? They did receive help from the Allies and did cooperate to a certain extent but there was no joining of the Allies by the USSR.

Japan was part of the Axis so how are you stating that it is not? If the Japanese would have stayed with the Allies from WWI, then I think that politically things would have been different for Japan.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

OK. So the US is sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic. I suppose the British can clear out of the Atlantic and let that happen. Fine with us. Is that what you say they would do? Even then, will there be no incidences anywhere? No ships staring suspiciously across the waves at each other - with fingers on the triggers?

warspite1

Is that what I say they would do? I am sorry, I didn't think I could make it any plainer. No, as soon as Stalin and Churchill heard the Japanese attacked the US, they would drop their oriental 'Ally' like a stone.

That wasn't what I asked. Read it again: If the US was sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic, would Britain clear out of the Atlantic to allow that?

I ask you again, and will continue to ask:

- How does the effectively bankrupt British Empire function without US aid?
- Why does Stalin even consider choosing Japan over the US given what it means in the war against Germany?

How does Stalin have that option with a Republican administration? Why would the US be forced to choose Stalin over Hitler after being attacked by an Allied Power?

How can you continue to claim this is all "absurd"? It has to, at least, be plausible. That's all it requires.

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

The USSR did not become a member of the Allies.

At least de facto members.

Japan was part of the Axis...

Not in this alternate scenario. Watch the video.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Curtis Lemay is missing the point by seeing the Axis and Allies as two definitive blocks. And China and Japan are just one example. So Japan agree to send a couple of ships to the Atlantic and a couple of brigades to Egypt (whoop whoop) in return for what? Britain will at best be expected to stop aiding China. So Britain is now potentially creating yet another enemy in the Chinese.... Great, a bankrupt empire can't have enough enemies can they?

Are you saying that if neutral Japan seeks to become a member of the Allies they would be turned down? Any instance of that sort of refusal elsewhere? Clearly, the USSR was accepted. Once a member, their actions reflect on the Alliance.

warspite1

Please, think real world here. Japan can declare war on Germany/Italy if it likes. That doesn't mean that Britain are going to have to welcome Japan with open arms. Japan can do their own thing. The British will accept what they can but the US are in the driving seat. They can tell Chruchill he faces a choice - lend lease and other support or Britain can aid Japan. The choice is yours.

If you believe that Britain would ignore the USA then I ask yet again, how does bankrupt Britain - a country that can't even repair all its own naval vessels - conduct a World War without supplies, food and weapons from the US?

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Curtis Lemay is missing the point by seeing the Axis and Allies as two definitive blocks. And China and Japan are just one example. So Japan agree to send a couple of ships to the Atlantic and a couple of brigades to Egypt (whoop whoop) in return for what? Britain will at best be expected to stop aiding China. So Britain is now potentially creating yet another enemy in the Chinese.... Great, a bankrupt empire can't have enough enemies can they?

Are you saying that if neutral Japan seeks to become a member of the Allies they would be turned down? Any instance of that sort of refusal elsewhere? Clearly, the USSR was accepted. Once a member, their actions reflect on the Alliance.

But what of the USSR? Apparently Stalin is happy to attack China (which of course aids Japan and does nothing for the USSR) despite the fact that the Soviets are fighting the Germans without the benefit of Lend Lease and indeed the Germans are getting help from the US. So what forces does Stalin use against China exactly???? And why help the Japanese (even if they could) who the Soviets detest?

Again, a Repulican administration might see the combo of Communism and Japan as worse than the Axis. Who knows how little would be necessary to trigger war with the USSR under that circumstance?

warspite1

Sorry, but how does this answer the point I raised about the Soviet ability, let alone wish, to get embroiled in a war with China when the Germans are driving them back?

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

OK. So the US is sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic. I suppose the British can clear out of the Atlantic and let that happen. Fine with us. Is that what you say they would do? Even then, will there be no incidences anywhere? No ships staring suspiciously across the waves at each other - with fingers on the triggers?

warspite1

Is that what I say they would do? I am sorry, I didn't think I could make it any plainer. No, as soon as Stalin and Churchill heard the Japanese attacked the US, they would drop their oriental 'Ally' like a stone.

That wasn't what I asked. Read it again: If the US was sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic, would Britain clear out of the Atlantic to allow that?

warspite1

You are not reading what I wrote. There is no reason that an American administration would suddenly become pro-Fascist. That is just not happening.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

OK. So the US is sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic. I suppose the British can clear out of the Atlantic and let that happen. Fine with us. Is that what you say they would do? Even then, will there be no incidences anywhere? No ships staring suspiciously across the waves at each other - with fingers on the triggers?

warspite1

Is that what I say they would do? I am sorry, I didn't think I could make it any plainer. No, as soon as Stalin and Churchill heard the Japanese attacked the US, they would drop their oriental 'Ally' like a stone.

That wasn't what I asked. Read it again: If the US was sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic, would Britain clear out of the Atlantic to allow that?

I ask you again, and will continue to ask:

- How does the effectively bankrupt British Empire function without US aid?
- Why does Stalin even consider choosing Japan over the US given what it means in the war against Germany?

How does Stalin have that option with a Republican administration? Why would the US be forced to choose Stalin over Hitler after being attacked by an Allied Power?

How can you continue to claim this is all "absurd"? It has to, at least, be plausible. That's all it requires.

warspite1

You haven't looked at the video OR you have but you are assuming that in June 1941 (with everything happening as per the historical) the US decide not to support Stalin. Even if we indulge that for the moment, that still doesn't make the US pro-Fascist. The fall of the USSR means the almost certain fall of Britain. Why does a Republican Government want Europe dominated by Hitler?

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Curtis Lemay is missing the point by seeing the Axis and Allies as two definitive blocks. And China and Japan are just one example. So Japan agree to send a couple of ships to the Atlantic and a couple of brigades to Egypt (whoop whoop) in return for what? Britain will at best be expected to stop aiding China. So Britain is now potentially creating yet another enemy in the Chinese.... Great, a bankrupt empire can't have enough enemies can they?

Are you saying that if neutral Japan seeks to become a member of the Allies they would be turned down? Any instance of that sort of refusal elsewhere? Clearly, the USSR was accepted. Once a member, their actions reflect on the Alliance.

warspite1

Please, think real world here. Japan can declare war on Germany/Italy if it likes. That doesn't mean that Britain are going to have to welcome Japan with open arms. Japan can do their own thing. The British will accept what they can but the US are in the driving seat. They can tell Chruchill he faces a choice - lend lease and other support or Britain can aid Japan. The choice is yours.

If you believe that Britain would ignore the USA then I ask yet again, how does bankrupt Britain - a country that can't even repair all its own naval vessels - conduct a World War without supplies, food and weapons from the US?

Why wouldn't the US want Japan as a British ally instead of an Axis one? Isn't that good news at the time for both the US and the British? Japan doesn't join the Axis!!! It joins the Allies!!!

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1


warspite1

Is that what I say they would do? I am sorry, I didn't think I could make it any plainer. No, as soon as Stalin and Churchill heard the Japanese attacked the US, they would drop their oriental 'Ally' like a stone.

That wasn't what I asked. Read it again: If the US was sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic, would Britain clear out of the Atlantic to allow that?

warspite1

You are not reading what I wrote. There is no reason that an American administration would suddenly become pro-Fascist. That is just not happening.

You are not reading what I wrote. Anti-Communist, not pro-Fascist.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Curtis Lemay is missing the point by seeing the Axis and Allies as two definitive blocks. And China and Japan are just one example. So Japan agree to send a couple of ships to the Atlantic and a couple of brigades to Egypt (whoop whoop) in return for what? Britain will at best be expected to stop aiding China. So Britain is now potentially creating yet another enemy in the Chinese.... Great, a bankrupt empire can't have enough enemies can they?

Are you saying that if neutral Japan seeks to become a member of the Allies they would be turned down? Any instance of that sort of refusal elsewhere? Clearly, the USSR was accepted. Once a member, their actions reflect on the Alliance.

But what of the USSR? Apparently Stalin is happy to attack China (which of course aids Japan and does nothing for the USSR) despite the fact that the Soviets are fighting the Germans without the benefit of Lend Lease and indeed the Germans are getting help from the US. So what forces does Stalin use against China exactly???? And why help the Japanese (even if they could) who the Soviets detest?

Again, a Repulican administration might see the combo of Communism and Japan as worse than the Axis. Who knows how little would be necessary to trigger war with the USSR under that circumstance?

warspite1

Sorry, but how does this answer the point I raised about the Soviet ability, let alone wish, to get embroiled in a war with China when the Germans are driving them back?

War with China doesn't have to be the trigger. Just the fact that Japan is an Ally could, with a Republican administration be enough to make the USSR seem more of a threat than Nazi Germany. Or, if an incident is required, any would do. Soviet equipment turning up in Japanese units, etc.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay




Are you saying that if neutral Japan seeks to become a member of the Allies they would be turned down? Any instance of that sort of refusal elsewhere? Clearly, the USSR was accepted. Once a member, their actions reflect on the Alliance.

warspite1

Please, think real world here. Japan can declare war on Germany/Italy if it likes. That doesn't mean that Britain are going to have to welcome Japan with open arms. Japan can do their own thing. The British will accept what they can but the US are in the driving seat. They can tell Chruchill he faces a choice - lend lease and other support or Britain can aid Japan. The choice is yours.

If you believe that Britain would ignore the USA then I ask yet again, how does bankrupt Britain - a country that can't even repair all its own naval vessels - conduct a World War without supplies, food and weapons from the US?

Why wouldn't the US want Japan as a British ally instead of an Axis one? Isn't that good news at the time for both the US and the British? Japan doesn't join the Axis!!! It joins the Allies!!!

warspite1

Lol. If, Japan seeks to declare war on Germany then great. Everyone's a winner baby. Except.....

.... Japan are still in China. And the US are going to be wary of any Alliance made because Japan is still a potential enemy. As are Britain wary too for fear of upsetting the US.

You seem to believe that there is only one type of ally - all in or all out. The world - realpolitik - is more nuanced. Will the US and Britain welcome Japan's involvement? Cautiously at best and as said, if the US believe that Japan want too much for their help then they will do what needs to be done to ensure that they are disbused of the notion that this is a quick, easy win to keep hold of China.

Remember Japan did this in WWI. They declared war on Germany but actually did very little to assist the Western Allies. What they did do by declaring war, was to gain German possessions in the Pacific at the end of the war. It wouldn't need much reading between the lines to understand that Japan would be trying a similar tactic. Declare war on Germany to represent themselves as Allies, give the least possible assistance in Europe, and keep their foothold in China....

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay




That wasn't what I asked. Read it again: If the US was sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic, would Britain clear out of the Atlantic to allow that?

warspite1

You are not reading what I wrote. There is no reason that an American administration would suddenly become pro-Fascist. That is just not happening.

You are not reading what I wrote. Anti-Communist, not pro-Fascist.

warspite1

You are not reading what you have written. You have said the US are sending supplies to the Fascists in order that they destroy Stalin. And that means Britain next. You think that is not a pro-Fascist move?

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1


warspite1

Is that what I say they would do? I am sorry, I didn't think I could make it any plainer. No, as soon as Stalin and Churchill heard the Japanese attacked the US, they would drop their oriental 'Ally' like a stone.

That wasn't what I asked. Read it again: If the US was sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic, would Britain clear out of the Atlantic to allow that?

I ask you again, and will continue to ask:

- How does the effectively bankrupt British Empire function without US aid?
- Why does Stalin even consider choosing Japan over the US given what it means in the war against Germany?

How does Stalin have that option with a Republican administration? Why would the US be forced to choose Stalin over Hitler after being attacked by an Allied Power?

How can you continue to claim this is all "absurd"? It has to, at least, be plausible. That's all it requires.

warspite1

You haven't looked at the video OR you have but you are assuming that in June 1941 (with everything happening as per the historical) the US decide not to support Stalin. Even if we indulge that for the moment, that still doesn't make the US pro-Fascist. The fall of the USSR means the almost certain fall of Britain. Why does a Republican Government want Europe dominated by Hitler?

How was the end result in the video so much worse than the historical ending? Germany stands as a bulwark against the Soviets and everything else is America's. Perhaps better than red tides all over the place.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1


warspite1

You are not reading what I wrote. There is no reason that an American administration would suddenly become pro-Fascist. That is just not happening.

You are not reading what I wrote. Anti-Communist, not pro-Fascist.

warspite1

You are not reading what you have written. You have said the US are sending supplies to the Fascists in order that they destroy Stalin. And that means Britain next. You think that is not a pro-Fascist move?

That wasn't the ending in the video.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay




Are you saying that if neutral Japan seeks to become a member of the Allies they would be turned down? Any instance of that sort of refusal elsewhere? Clearly, the USSR was accepted. Once a member, their actions reflect on the Alliance.



Again, a Repulican administration might see the combo of Communism and Japan as worse than the Axis. Who knows how little would be necessary to trigger war with the USSR under that circumstance?

warspite1

Sorry, but how does this answer the point I raised about the Soviet ability, let alone wish, to get embroiled in a war with China when the Germans are driving them back?

War with China doesn't have to be the trigger. Just the fact that Japan is an Ally could, with a Republican administration be enough to make the USSR seem more of a threat than Nazi Germany. Or, if an incident is required, any would do. Soviet equipment turning up in Japanese units, etc.

warspite1

So let me get this right. You see no issue with Japan and Britain being allies (see your posts above) but the Soviets and Japan as allies is a big no no and has the Americans cosying up to Fascists?

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Lol. If, Japan seeks to declare war on Germany then great. Everyone's a winner baby. Except.....

.... Japan are still in China. And the US are going to be wary of any Alliance made because Japan is still a potential enemy. As are Britain for fear of upsetting the US.

You seem to believe that there is only one type of ally - all in or all out. The world - realpolitik - is more nuanced. Will the US and Britain welcome Japan's involvement? Cautiously at best and as said, if the US believe that Japan want too much for their help then they will do what needs to be done to ensure that they are disbused of the notion that this is a quick, easy win to keep hold of China.

Sorry, but I can't see any way that Japan NOT joining the Axis AND joining the Allies would be seen as anything other that good news at the time.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1


warspite1

Sorry, but how does this answer the point I raised about the Soviet ability, let alone wish, to get embroiled in a war with China when the Germans are driving them back?

War with China doesn't have to be the trigger. Just the fact that Japan is an Ally could, with a Republican administration be enough to make the USSR seem more of a threat than Nazi Germany. Or, if an incident is required, any would do. Soviet equipment turning up in Japanese units, etc.

warspite1

So let me get this right. You see no issue with Japan and Britain being allies (see your posts above) but the Soviets and Japan as allies is a big no no and has the Americans cosying up to Fascists?

After being attacked by an Allied Power.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay




That wasn't what I asked. Read it again: If the US was sending war material to the Axis via the Atlantic, would Britain clear out of the Atlantic to allow that?


How does Stalin have that option with a Republican administration? Why would the US be forced to choose Stalin over Hitler after being attacked by an Allied Power?

How can you continue to claim this is all "absurd"? It has to, at least, be plausible. That's all it requires.

warspite1

You haven't looked at the video OR you have but you are assuming that in June 1941 (with everything happening as per the historical) the US decide not to support Stalin. Even if we indulge that for the moment, that still doesn't make the US pro-Fascist. The fall of the USSR means the almost certain fall of Britain. Why does a Republican Government want Europe dominated by Hitler?

How was the end result in the video so much worse than the historical ending? Germany stands as a bulwark against the Soviets and everything else is America's. Perhaps better than red tides all over the place.

warspite1

Why are you talking about how things ends? No one in 1941 knows how things ends. But one thing is entirely possible given what people thought they knew in 1941 - The Nazis would conquer the USSR and likely Britain, long before the US made an appearance in Europe. But you are suggesting the US would, like the three bears, gauge their involvement just right - not too early, not too late, so that the Germans and Soviets are at a stalemate and the US are in Europe?

Come on can't suggest that is a reasonable view point. No one knows that the Atomic bomb will be successful. If the Germans win in the USSR, the world is in trouble.... and according to you, the US administration would be happy to have helped that....

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay




You are not reading what I wrote. Anti-Communist, not pro-Fascist.

warspite1

You are not reading what you have written. You have said the US are sending supplies to the Fascists in order that they destroy Stalin. And that means Britain next. You think that is not a pro-Fascist move?

That wasn't the ending in the video.

warspite1

Oh that's all right then.... what??

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Lol. If, Japan seeks to declare war on Germany then great. Everyone's a winner baby. Except.....

.... Japan are still in China. And the US are going to be wary of any Alliance made because Japan is still a potential enemy. As are Britain for fear of upsetting the US.

You seem to believe that there is only one type of ally - all in or all out. The world - realpolitik - is more nuanced. Will the US and Britain welcome Japan's involvement? Cautiously at best and as said, if the US believe that Japan want too much for their help then they will do what needs to be done to ensure that they are disbused of the notion that this is a quick, easy win to keep hold of China.

Sorry, but I can't see any way that Japan NOT joining the Axis AND joining the Allies would be seen as anything other that good news at the time.

warspite1

Well then you don't understand how the US thought of Japan. And Britain's thoughts on Japan are pretty irrelevant because the US hold all the cards. Japanese help against Germany? Great. Japan thinking they will use this declaration against Germany in order to gain at the expense of China? No, not the slightest chance of that being allowed by the US. Indeed the video agrees.