WW2 qusetions

**JDNSW** · 7th December 2007, 08:01 AM

Originally Posted by 303gunner

That was actually much more of a hornet's nest than German reparations ever could become. The Middle East was a relatively stable region in Muslim hands since the end of the 3rd Crusades in the 12th Century under the Ottoman Empire. With the downfall of the Turks at Aust, British and French hands, 700 years of stability was gone. It took a couple of decades after WW1 for the locals to realise that the balance of power had changed forever, and it still hasn't settled, in fact it continues to get worse. The Turks weren't in favour of local rule by the Arabs and could be quite harsh in supressing independence, but it was the Status Quo and everyone accepted it. The British and French who occupied the region after the war though they knew how the tribes could be controlled, but got it deriously wrong.

The one good thing that came out of the Middle East is that despite Australia's pivotal role in the defeat of the Turks, Billy Hughes wanted no part of the Ottoman Empire as reparations, instead settling for the German colonies of Papua, New Britain and New Ireland (New Guinea was already an Aust Territory at the beginning of WW1). Could you imagine the S*** we would be in today if we were responsible for a little slice of the Middle East?

I'd have to disagree with some of that - the Ottoman empire (which really did not get fully established until 1453 with the fall of Constantinople (now Istanbul) rather than after the third crusade) was already falling apart by well before WW1. They had effectively lost all their north African bits, with, for example, Egypt being controlled by Britain and France since the 1880s (and successfully invaded but only temporarily occupied by both France and then Britain in the very early nineteenth century). They lost Greece in the 1820s and they were already in the process of losing the Balkans and Crete before WW1. So your comments really only apply to the Arab areas of the Middle East from Syria to Arabia and East to Iraq - and the Ottoman Empire probably could not have held onto these for too much longer anyway.

Just a correction to your Australian territories - Australia had taken over from Queensland the Territory of Papua (not New Guinea) in about 1906. After the war, Australia asked for and was granted a League of Nations Mandate over German New Guinea (not Papua) comprising the NE part of the island of New Guinea plus a number of islands including New Britain, New Ireland and Manaus, which Australia had captured from Germany in 1914 and occupied since then. This Mandated Territory had its capital at Rabaul in New Britain, and was converted to a United Nations Mandate after WW2, the administration being combined with that of the Australian territory and located in Port Moresby. The Australian and Mandated Teritories were merged into Papua New Guinea with self government and later independence.

John

**Lotz-A-Landies** · 7th December 2007, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by dobbo

should that read
no Hitler, a lot less need for Morphine.

Dobbo

Goering was the morphine addict

Hitler was addicted to methamphetamine and topical cocaine and a host of other physician ordered preparations.

But I get your point about, no Hitler, ? no war, no causalities, no need of morphine for battlefield causalities.

Diana

Zute · 7th December 2007, 02:34 PM

What if Albert Einstein had not fled Germany and had instead joined the Nazi party ? V-weapons + A-bombs ?

**Jeff** · 7th December 2007, 02:47 PM

All these what ifs...

What if the internet was not used for porn, or if emails weren't free would it have taken off like it has?

Sorry, a bit off topic.

With the benefit of hindsight we can see that Stalin was arguably more evil than Hitler. The Fins saw it and generations have struggled with the dilemma, should they have sided with Stalin instead?

Jeff

**FenianEel** · 7th December 2007, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by Zute

What if Albert Einstein had not fled Germany and had instead joined the Nazi party ? V-weapons + A-bombs ?

Wasn't he Tasmanian?

Originally Posted by Jeff

All these what ifs...

What if the internet was not used for porn, or if emails weren't free would it have taken off like it has?

Sorry, a bit off topic.

With the benefit of hindsight we can see that Stalin was arguably more evil than Hitler. The Fins saw it and generations have struggled with the dilemma, should they have sided with Stalin instead?

Jeff

Stalin killed many many more people, and left many more wishing they were dead or in a living hell. No arguably about it, he was evil personified.
Right up there with the worst of them.

**JDNSW** · 7th December 2007, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by FenianEel

Wasn't he Tasmanian?

Stalin killed many many more people, and left many more wishing they were dead or in a living hell. No arguably about it, he was evil personified.
Right up there with the worst of them.

And they were both allied until Hitler turned East!

John

**FenianEel** · 7th December 2007, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by JDNSW

And they were both allied until Hitler turned East!

John

How ordinary would it be to be a Russian.
Yeah our side won, otherwise we were looking at genocide, but now we can look forward to 50 years of poverty, oppression and genocide.

**Jamo** · 7th December 2007, 04:27 PM

Einstein fled to switzerland well before the war as he was at odds with the german way of thinking. He hated their rigid society. Plus he was a jew and was on their hit list. Indeed, he wasn't that much into his own religion until anti-semitism began to rise ion Germany.

Mao killed more than Stalin and Hitler put together (an estimated 70million+ chinese).

Stalin was reputely stunned when Hitler turned on him. He supposedly wouldn't listen to advisers when they told him not to trust Hitler.

Stalin also kept his best troops behind the main force, so they could kill anyone who tried to run.

An interesting fact is that when germany invaded France, the french merchant fleet did what the french do best in war and sat in harbour and handed over their ships. The Norwegians (who had the biggest merchant fleet in the world at the time) saw the germans coming and set sail for england.

**Lotz-A-Landies** · 7th December 2007, 04:36 PM

Originally Posted by FenianEel

Stalin killed many many more people, and left many more wishing they were dead or in a living hell. No arguably about it, he was evil personified.
Right up there with the worst of them.

The most fascinating thing was that at the end of the War, many senior German officers admitted to the Yanks, that they had lost the war in the West but then turned around and suggested that the Western Allies (Brittan and the US) should join with the Germans and defeat Stalin.

How different would be the World be, if that had happened. By the time of the Potsdam conference, Churchill knew it but Truman couldn't see it. I guess the War in the Pacific against Japan was still an unfinished book.

**skidmark77** · 7th December 2007, 07:12 PM

wow
This forum is a wealth of knowledge
My dad was only 5 or 6 in Malta when the Italians started bombing. He would tell me that their hearts weren't in it. the either dropped bombs from a great height, or would drop them into the sea. the Germans were more dedicated to their cause though. apparently twice the weight of bombs were dropped on malta than on england. amazing considering it is such a small island. they could not take the island though (though they probably would have if they used ships).
He died last year at the age of 71, something more evil than the Nazis got him, C.....

Thread: WW2 qusetions

Thread Tools

what if

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions