bouzane said:
rocketpig said:
bouzane said:
Mr Khan said:
Rath said:
That video doesn't show whether he is talking about Iraq or Afghanistan.
On the topic of WWII, don't ignore the British contribution! It was the British who turned one of the fronts against Germany in the Battle of Britain. |
Certainly. It is between the loss of the battle of Britain and the later loss of Stalingrad that guaranteed that the Germans would lose eventually, and American involvement merely made it cleaner than it might have been.
|
It would be foolish to downplay the resistance offered by the British people during World War II but lets not kid ourselves. The Battle of Britain cost the Axis approximately 3,700 KIA/MIA + Captured whereas the war with the Soviet Union cost the Axis 9.9 million KIA/MIA + Captured.
|
What was important was keeping a second (or third if you count Africa/Italy) front open, stretching the Nazi forces more thinly than the relatively meager German population could support.
|
In that case we can conclusively say it was an utter failure. The Germans successfully rerouted their forces and launched Operation Barbarossa, the largest and most successful military operation in human history.
|
Which was doomed from the outset and opposed by many people in the German military. Just because they did it didn't mean it was logical or a good idea. Holding off the Germans in the Battle of Britain didn't stretch the Germans intially because the Allies didn't return with aggression; they simply weren't ready. But by 1943 when the bombs started dropping and in 1944 when invasion was imminent, it was the death blow to the Nazis. They simply couldn't handle both the Russians and a coordinated Allied invasion from the west. Without Britain, that simply wouldn't have been possible.
