Well, that's possible, but they were not the bulk of the army then...maybe 30-40%...I don't know...
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Well, that's possible, but they were not the bulk of the army then...maybe 30-40%...I don't know...
Re: re
1. To stop the USSR from occupying parts of Japan and more japanese controlled territory.
2. To test its effect against a civilian target.
3. To show off, and scare the soviets.
4. To hasten the end of the war, which would mean less US casualties.
The dropping of the A-bombs was one of WWIIs great atrocities, and its a shame the parties responsible was never brought to justice.
The A-bomb was dropped for the following reasons:
1. To stop the USSR from occupying parts of Japan and more japanese controlled territory.
2. To test its effect against a civilian target.
3. To show off, and scare the soviets.
4. To hasten the end of the war, which would mean less US casualties.
The dropping of the A-bombs was one of WWIIs great atrocities, and its a shame the parties responsible was never brought to justice.
Belgium's masterplan to stop the Germans was:
one big metal fence...
Indeed, Belgian Generals thought they could scare the Germans by building a fence through the country
one big metal fence...
Indeed, Belgian Generals thought they could scare the Germans by building a fence through the country
i dont have the EXACt numbers but here is very close. the only part of the french army in the maginot line were about 15 class b divisions which scared the germans off cuz they were in the maginot line. 85% of the strenght(not numbers) of the french army was planned to rush to aid belgium along with the BEF but as we all know it got flanked and the allies had NO reserve leading to their collapse. if the allies had realized that the only chance germany had to win was like ww1 or the ardennes and had kept all the good troops back instead of guessing they could have beaten at least the first attack off. though germany air superiority would have won eventualy.
for the record the a-bomb was dropped to save 1million american lives. indirectly it saved about 15-20million japanease lives. so if you consider saving that many people an atrocity then i have to pity you
the only chance belgium has is to make france scrape the manginot line so germany can invade them direct and not through belgium at all.
for the record the a-bomb was dropped to save 1million american lives. indirectly it saved about 15-20million japanease lives. so if you consider saving that many people an atrocity then i have to pity you
the only chance belgium has is to make france scrape the manginot line so germany can invade them direct and not through belgium at all.
I listed that as one of the reasons, that doesnt make it less of an atrocity. And if saving lives and ending the war early was so important, why didnt they use it against a military target?Originally posted by jacob-Lundgren
for the record the a-bomb was dropped to save 1million american lives. indirectly it saved about 15-20million japanease lives. so if you consider saving that many people an atrocity then i have to pity you
After consulting with my chief of staff (housed on the left side of my brain) we arrived to the conclussion that the only hope for Belgium is that the Brittish and the French are better prepeared for the war and commit themselves to save Belgium.
In other words, Belgium doesn't have a chance in hell of defeating Germany.........
In other words, Belgium doesn't have a chance in hell of defeating Germany.........
Hehe... And that van Zeeland fella seemed so smart Or was that the period of Pierlot already?
Or was that the period of Pierlot already? 
Those cities were military targets.
Hiroshima housed the Southern Army command Headquarters, as well as was factories.
Originally posted by VultureGFF
Hehe... And that van Zeeland fella seemed so smart
Doesn't matter, I see Stevaert doing the same thing...
Sounds like Eutopia.Originally posted by Jools
Ahh, you must be one of those rightist neo nazi Flamandistani bastards
And as for the American casualties in Olympic:
Casualties were expected to be between 250,000-500,000
Actual dead Americans were expected to be one fourth of that, as experience dictates. And the detonation of the nuclear weapons was a legitimate act against a legitimate target- a city vital to the production of armaments (i.e., it was really big, and since much Japanese armaments came from small firms and cottage industries...). If anything is an atrocity, the best (worst?) ones for the Allies are: Dresden -little military value- and the massacre of Polish troops who had surrendered by the Red Army.
Breda..Holland
And some elements of the French expeditionary force got to Breda/Hollland may 12th, when the germans were just pouring through the Ardennes/Sedan region...(according to plan..; the trap)..
So they were able to move quick..."..but, according to military observers of the time, many of the French divisions were made up of poorly trained,
ill-disciplined and unwilling conscripts. Thus the balance of power was not as the figures suggest. France had, at that
time, mobilised one man in eight. Britain, by contrast, had mobilised one in forty-eight, but her army was more effective,
professional in outlook and prepared to fight (!!!!)..".
and 'Belgium' ..what is that ?
Then and now; there are only Flemish and Walonians..
with the Flemish back then having a tendency (careful)towards the fascists, and the Walonians a (strong) tendency towards the French..(what ? ideoligy ?)...
come to think of it..it is still the case..
Odd though to read that the french units in 1940 were bags of shit..and in 1944 under LeClerc men of outstanding fighting spirit (far better than the yanks!).
Another interesting thought: The soviets were ONLY able to survive and continue to be in the war BECAUSE THEY HAD MUCH LAND TO FALL BACK TO.
De Gaulle most aptly pointed that out when visiting Stalin.
Notwithstanding the disgraceful soldiering of the french in 1940 (as the russians in 1941), I firmly believe that when the French(or any nation) has a sizeable country like the soviets, they were able to prolong and possibly 'win' the war...
And some elements of the French expeditionary force got to Breda/Hollland may 12th, when the germans were just pouring through the Ardennes/Sedan region...(according to plan..; the trap)..
So they were able to move quick..."..but, according to military observers of the time, many of the French divisions were made up of poorly trained,
ill-disciplined and unwilling conscripts. Thus the balance of power was not as the figures suggest. France had, at that
time, mobilised one man in eight. Britain, by contrast, had mobilised one in forty-eight, but her army was more effective,
professional in outlook and prepared to fight (!!!!)..".
and 'Belgium' ..what is that ?
Then and now; there are only Flemish and Walonians..
with the Flemish back then having a tendency (careful)towards the fascists, and the Walonians a (strong) tendency towards the French..(what ? ideoligy ?)...
come to think of it..it is still the case..
Odd though to read that the french units in 1940 were bags of shit..and in 1944 under LeClerc men of outstanding fighting spirit (far better than the yanks!).
Another interesting thought: The soviets were ONLY able to survive and continue to be in the war BECAUSE THEY HAD MUCH LAND TO FALL BACK TO.
De Gaulle most aptly pointed that out when visiting Stalin.
Notwithstanding the disgraceful soldiering of the french in 1940 (as the russians in 1941), I firmly believe that when the French(or any nation) has a sizeable country like the soviets, they were able to prolong and possibly 'win' the war...
Originally posted by jacob-Lundgren
for the record the a-bomb was dropped to save 1million american lives. indirectly it saved about 15-20million japanease lives. so if you consider saving that many people an atrocity then i have to pity you
I think that saving lifes by killing innocents (even if there were millitary targets destroyed by the a-bombs, many civilians were killed) is an attrocity.
There is a 'simple' way for Belgium to win this war : remain neutral. I think it's the best solution for this country, while this won't be easy.
Do you think you will still be abble to play with Congo when the Belgium mainland will be lost ?
I think Belgium may take its own part of WW2 if then devellops Navy a little and that they use it to protect convoy, wich is a quite important part of the supply war that has been fough between the french surrender and D-Day, maybe even after that time.
Don't forget Belgium isn't a super-power, but this country still makes its contribution to the war.
Historical note :
1. Belgian Uranium was used for the american A-bombs at that time mainly because it was the purest source known at this time period.
2. 29 belgian pilots fough the Battle of England in the R.A.F., this is not much, but Belgium was a very small country.
Do you think you will still be abble to play with Congo when the Belgium mainland will be lost ?
I think Belgium may take its own part of WW2 if then devellops Navy a little and that they use it to protect convoy, wich is a quite important part of the supply war that has been fough between the french surrender and D-Day, maybe even after that time.
Don't forget Belgium isn't a super-power, but this country still makes its contribution to the war.
Historical note :
1. Belgian Uranium was used for the american A-bombs at that time mainly because it was the purest source known at this time period.
2. 29 belgian pilots fough the Battle of England in the R.A.F., this is not much, but Belgium was a very small country.
So we should have proceeded to land on the mainland like any island grind up half a million soldiers blowing them out of every single rock on the island (like all the others) and fought them down to the capital building? (ala Berlin versus the Soviets circa 1945..) we would have killed even more innocent Japanese that way.... and more of our own men... it was simply the quickest and most life saving (yes most live saving for both sides) way to end the war PLUS if we hadnt Japan would be like Korea...half and half if my knowledge is right when we dropped the bomb the Soviets were about 2.5 weeks away from a naval invasion of Japan....which would have made it even worse with another North South Communist Democratic situation.....
I agree to say that this was the "less bad" of the solutions, but that doesn't make it a "good" solution. Do you see my point ?
Re: Breda..Holland
Listen buddy, those are fragrant lies!
Between the Flemish and Walonian people the Walonians had a larger amount of colaborators, and their are less Walonians then Flemish. The most famous fascist leader in Belgium was walonian, Degrelle and his fascist party rex.
The Flemish 'fascist' movement consisted from two groups:
-people who colaborated with the Germans hoping to get an independent Flanders
-the VERDINASO, a non-violent 'fascist' movement, they are called fascist because they wore uniforms and believed in discipline.
The leader of the VERDINASO abhorred violence refused to meet Hitler. Van Severen was shot by the French while he fled from the German army, some VERDINASO-members colaborated with the germans others joined the resistance.
From all Belgian colaborators Degrelles was by far the worst, he had Belgians killed, recruited youngsters for the Waffen-SS.
He actually fought many battles in Russia and had many lucky ascapes from death (one plane crash, being shot at by sniper while at horseback, the sniper was in a tree and missed, Degrelles shot once with his pistol and killed the sniper he couldn't even see ). After the war he escaped to spain, he died in 1990 (I think, not quite sure).
Don't know why you think the Flemish were fascists, they were no worse than the Dutch.
Rant over.
EDIT: removed some mistakes, accidenttly switched some names around
Listen buddy, those are fragrant lies!
Between the Flemish and Walonian people the Walonians had a larger amount of colaborators, and their are less Walonians then Flemish. The most famous fascist leader in Belgium was walonian, Degrelle and his fascist party rex.
The Flemish 'fascist' movement consisted from two groups:
-people who colaborated with the Germans hoping to get an independent Flanders
-the VERDINASO, a non-violent 'fascist' movement, they are called fascist because they wore uniforms and believed in discipline.
The leader of the VERDINASO abhorred violence refused to meet Hitler. Van Severen was shot by the French while he fled from the German army, some VERDINASO-members colaborated with the germans others joined the resistance.
From all Belgian colaborators Degrelles was by far the worst, he had Belgians killed, recruited youngsters for the Waffen-SS.
He actually fought many battles in Russia and had many lucky ascapes from death (one plane crash, being shot at by sniper while at horseback, the sniper was in a tree and missed, Degrelles shot once with his pistol and killed the sniper he couldn't even see
). After the war he escaped to spain, he died in 1990 (I think, not quite sure).Don't know why you think the Flemish were fascists, they were no worse than the Dutch.
Rant over.
EDIT: removed some mistakes, accidenttly switched some names around
Last edited:
The A-Bomb stuff should really be moved to the OT forums.
But check out the latest screenshot - you can just make out some of Belgium's military.
But check out the latest screenshot - you can just make out some of Belgium's military.