ORIGINAL: loki100
ORIGINAL: Balou
Still it would like to know to what extent allied strat bombing did (help to) knock out Germany. History experts please step in, there should be figures.
I don't think it did. Most sources seem to argue that German industrial production hit its peak in 1944 and only declined in 1945 due to loss of territory.
The quote may be anecdotal but one Allied general summarised the situation in May 1945 as 'the Soviets won the war, we just happened to be nearby'.
The decisive element was the destruction of manpower and material by the Soviets, plus the steady loss of critical resources as the Red Army advanced into regions like Silesia and took over the oil regions in Rumania and Hungary.
What the game models well, is that there was an enduring belief among the allies that strategic bombing could be decisive, Harris persisted in his belief that civilian morale would crack as a result. For the British from 1940-3, Strategic bombing was the only offensive tool, so it was easy to decide to believe it was effective. I think the Americans were more pragmatic, but still they had invested a huge amount in heavy bombers so there was a bit of a mindset that once you'd built the blessed things, you really had to us them.
Yup its true the bombing did next to nothing to slow german production. They had planes, but no pilots/they had tank parks full of tanks, but no crews ect ect ect.
The bombing did keep 10,000's of 88's off the front lines.
Germans simply ran out of men, but Russia alone could in no way have taken out Germany alone.
Germany was bleeding Russia to death, simply math based on population and loses tells the truth as do bombing records vs german production.
Allot of the victory's write the history shortly after a conflict, but over time the truth comes out.
Russia without US trucks would have been fighting in the Urals by 43.
Germany was defeated by Russia and Western Allies not WA or Russia solo.
