War won because of good codebreakers.

[TheRomanRuler]

A big enough warhead can win a war by itself.

This is shell fired by Schwrerer Gustav

Tiny puny tank next to it is real T34-85.

 

[BobbyDylan]

As much as i'd like them to (i live in Europe), they wouldn't.
Not if it meant risking *their* manpower to annihilation. Because in such invasions a defeat is much more costly since you cannot fall back.

They would open limited fronts if they could, but against Germany with its powerbase much closer and no drains upon its power, it would be unfeasible to make significant gains. Maybe Sicily, maybe all Med Islands, North Africa most certainly, also Norway if possible, but not much more.



You overestimate the destructive power of the first nukes. They were not the automatic 'i win' button, except against a Japan humiliated, defeated in detail, too starved of resources and assets, and generally brought on its knees. That was the last straw for them.

Nobody can really say what would be the effect of nuking a Germany, while comfortably sitting on its powerbase with no Eastern front, but i bet they would not just surrender and accept whatever terms the allies want. They might endure and try to get their nukes too.

In short, if (as was the case) the USA cannot build an infinite number of nukes, and the ones they can are of low yield (also the case), they are not the decicive factor. Plane bombing raids could and did cause similar destruction (rules don't allow talking about that though)


PS. Sure such a what-if is a very good reason to play the game. Its a game after all. But IRL is another matter.

I (Respectfully) disagree. It would have taken longer, probably held off till Japan was dealt with. But the Allies, could invest massive manpower and materials into each landing site, spreading the Germans pretty thin. Nuke berlin, Hitler dead, all Nazi leaders gone. Bombing raids continue on the industrial centre.... Supplies are short for the axis, their leaders are all gone and have little reason to fight defending Italian, French and Norwegian boarders.....

I'm not saying it's easy, or cheap. The cost in lives and equipment would probably make up for 20 million that didn't die in the eastern front (in this hypothetical scenario) ButI don't think it's impossible. We'll never know, of course.

 

[jcd000]

I (Respectfully) disagree. It would have taken longer, probably held off till Japan was dealt with. But the Allies, could invest massive manpower and materials into each landing site, spreading the Germans pretty thin. Nuke berlin, Hitler dead, all Nazi leaders gone. Bombing raids continue on the industrial centre.... Supplies are short for the axis, their leaders are all gone and have little reason to fight defending Italian, French and Norwegian boarders.....

I'm not saying it's easy, or cheap. The cost in lives and equipment would probably make up for 20 million that didn't die in the eastern front (in this hypothetical scenario) ButI don't think it's impossible. We'll never know, of course.

So we don't disagree after all.
I think that what you describe is possible. (not sure if killing Hitler by nuke is that easy, but ok)
The Western allies sure had enough resources (industry, tech, manpower) to overwhelm Germany in the end.

But i'm arguing that neither the USA, not the UK, or the Commonwealth, or anyone else besides the SU would be prepared to pay that manpower price for a war outside their countries. (and the SU only did that because it had no choice, it was a war inside their country)

 

[seattle]

A big enough warhead can win a war by itself.

No, not at all!
The Japanese capitulated mostly due to the Soviet dow, not the nukes. The nukes didn't even cause a fraction of the damage the previous strategic bombing campaign inflicted on Japan. I'm sure that's a well known fact.

Let's say Hitler defeats Stalin and the Allies never get a foothold in continental Europe. Do you honestly believe that "a big enough warhead" dropped on a target of your choice would cause a German surrender? Let's please be realistic here, we're talking about WW2 nukes. Even a modern nuke wouldn't cause a surrender in that case.

 

[jcd000]

No, not at all!
The Japanese capitulated mostly due to the Soviet dow, not the nukes. The nukes didn't even cause a fraction of the damage the previous strategic bombing campaign inflicted on Japan. I'm sure that's a well known fact.

Let's say Hitler defeats Stalin and the Allies never get a foothold in continental Europe. Do you honestly believe that "a big enough warhead" dropped on a target of your choice would cause a German surrender? Let's please be realistic here, we're talking about WW2 nukes. Even a modern nuke wouldn't cause a surrender in that case.

I'll have to be pedantic and say here that a 'Tsar Bomba' at full yield in '45 would make *any* nation surrender.

 

[Sic Domine]

I'll have to be pedantic and say here that a 'Tsar Bomba' at full yield in '45 would make *any* nation surrender.

No it wouldn't.

 

[GrafKeks]

No, not at all!
The Japanese capitulated mostly due to the Soviet dow, not the nukes. The nukes didn't even cause a fraction of the damage the previous strategic bombing campaign inflicted on Japan. I'm sure that's a well known fact.

Let's say Hitler defeats Stalin and the Allies never get a foothold in continental Europe. Do you honestly believe that "a big enough warhead" dropped on a target of your choice would cause a German surrender? Let's please be realistic here, we're talking about WW2 nukes. Even a modern nuke wouldn't cause a surrender in that case.

BIGGER

If there is no one left to surrender you win.

We are talking way above a whole GT. Although I'd say the Tsar Bomba would have been enough to make the japanese yield.

Edit: I have to correct myself 9 to 10 AN602 should be enough to make Japan surrender

 

[DuroSVK]

And it could have saved the Pacific fleet stationed in Pearl Harbour, but the Japanese were smart by flooding transmissions with false information for the Americans to decrypt hours before the attack. I believe it was all part of their deception plan in fooling the Americans an attack will happen elsewhere.

They knew they were comming, why else do you think they moved out from pearl harbor all of their precious aircraft carriers and left only BB with screens?

 

[jcd000]

They knew they were comming, why else do you think they moved out from pearl harbor all of their precious aircraft carriers and left only BB with screens?

They'd never save the Carriers and allow the Battleships to die if they had the choice (at least in '41)

 

[DuroSVK]

They'd never save the Carriers and allow the Battleships to die if they had the choice (at least in '41)

Well, they just did it

 

[GrafKeks]

Well, they just did it

Japanese airwings can't melt BB's. Fukushima was an inside job.

 

[DuroSVK]

Japanese airwings can't melt BB's. Fukushima was an inside job.

I dont understand the second sentence

 

[Loke]

Indoors, not outside...

 

[GrafKeks]

I dont understand the second sentence

http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/...日本への地震兵器攻撃は米国のネバタ州とニューメキシコ州の米軍地下基地から発生した.html

You need to keep your conspiracies up to date

 

[DuroSVK]

http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/benjaminfulford/2011/03/日本への地震兵器攻撃は米国のネバタ州とニューメキシコ州の米軍地下基地から発生した.html

You need to keep your conspiracies up to date

I dont understand what are you talking about now, nor our discusion turned into...
I dont believe in conspiracies. Even US authorities confessed that in ´41 they knew Japaneese are going to strike and that most possible target is Pearl Harbor.
You dont have to read a ton of conspiracies to know that

 

[adil3tr]

I think with decryption you can see enemy war plans, so you can prepare a defense or strike before they get their bonus.

 

[wolf1455]

To say that an Atom bomb is a auto win is to say that fire bombing is an auto win device. Just to take Japan, the firebombing of forexample Tokyo made more damage and was in plentyfull supply and the A-bombs was not videly available. And to be honest, the fire bombings of Japan didnt made them wanting to surrender. To take a German example, the Allied bombings applied to Germany didnt make them wanting to surrender even if the damaged done was much more than a couple of nukes would have done.

 

[DuroSVK]

To say that an Atom bomb is a auto win is to say that fire bombing is an auto win device. Just to take Japan, the firebombing of forexample Tokyo made more damage and was in plentyfull supply and the A-bombs was not videly available. And to be honest, the fire bombings of Japan didnt made them wanting to surrender. To take a German example, the Allied bombings applied to Germany didnt make them wanting to surrender even if the damaged done was much more than a couple of nukes would have done.

Dont forget that A-Bomb wasnt the only reason why Japs surrendered.
There were also Soviets that invaded their land in Manchuria, cutting Japan out of last piece of war machine and factories they had.

 

[Porkman]

To say that an Atom bomb is a auto win is to say that fire bombing is an auto win device. Just to take Japan, the firebombing of forexample Tokyo made more damage and was in plentyfull supply and the A-bombs was not videly available. And to be honest, the fire bombings of Japan didnt made them wanting to surrender. To take a German example, the Allied bombings applied to Germany didnt make them wanting to surrender even if the damaged done was much more than a couple of nukes would have done.

You overestimate the destructive power of the first nukes. They were not the automatic 'i win' button, except against a Japan humiliated, defeated in detail, too starved of resources and assets, and generally brought on its knees. That was the last straw for them.

Nobody can really say what would be the effect of nuking a Germany, while comfortably sitting on its powerbase with no Eastern front, but i bet they would not just surrender and accept whatever terms the allies want. They might endure and try to get their nukes too.

In short, if (as was the case) the USA cannot build an infinite number of nukes, and the ones they can are of low yield (also the case), they are not the decicive factor. Plane bombing raids could and did cause similar destruction (rules don't allow talking about that though)


PS. Sure such a what-if is a very good reason to play the game. Its a game after all. But IRL is another matter.

EDIT
Bout the OP, i also feel that crypto IRL played a much greater role than the game portrays. Thing is, putting crypto in its correct place would not make for a great Grand Strategy Wargame. Most people want to play with armies and navies primarily.

I don't subscribe to the idea that the nukes made Japan surrender. The soviets were more important.

My point though is that nukes allow the Allies to hurt the Germans with no possible method of retribution and no hope.

The difference between a dedicated nuclear campaign and the firebombings is that nukes are far less resource intensive. The combined bomber offensive was thousands of planes in massive raids. The allies could destroy 10 large German cities in a single day with less than 100 planes.

In all of the "Germany wins the war" scenarios I've seen, no one has ever accounted for the fact that the US was able to build 10 A bombs a month by October of 1945 and that this capability was locked in by 1942.

 

[GrafKeks]

In all of the "Germany wins the war" scenarios I've seen, no one has ever accounted for the fact that the US was able to build 10 A bombs a month by October of 1945 and that this capability was locked in by 1942.

You obviously ignored German superio.... better gen.... SCIENCE! They obviously would have built a [strike]magic[/strike]( strike isn't working imagine that it does ) very good rocket which would have saved the whole of Germany while burning down the USA. In addition we all know that Germany was JUST SO SHORT of creating their own nukes and finding the holy grail. I bet you didn't account for this