View Single Post
  #4 (permalink)  
Old April 26th, 2008, 12:33 PM
Bravo104's Avatar
Bravo104 Bravo104 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Almere The Netherlands
Posts: 24
Bravo104 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Chamberlain didn't give Sudetenland to Hitler.

Quote:
So you think that just because the Germans didn't get the sudetenland (in this what if) the Britains would have lost the war, their island as well as the entire of Europe and the Soviets as well?
Considering the fact that the rest of the world was de-arming in an alarming rate, and unwilling to face the fact that there was a real threat in Germany's politics, I do.
If they could not get their hands on the resources from Czechoslovakia, they would have taken them elswhere. And not with war but through the regular channels. In this way they had been able to develope their army's further and would have had a big advantage to the rest of the world.

Quote:
Also you must take into account the fact that Germany was not a completely mechanized army as it leads us to believe, but mostly horsedrawn transports before and well into the war, so how could they take the entire of Europe with horses? How would they cross the channel? how would they go against the industrial might of Russia?
I'm well aware of that. But this was mainly in the beginnig of the war. Later on they became more and more mechanized. So, a couple years later should have made a lot of difference.
And not only to there army but also to the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine.
They were already developing in an alarming rate.
Reply With Quote