Professor Moriarty wrote: » The USSR caused Hitler's defeat.
indioblack wrote: » What's your point?
Fratton Fred wrote: » The UK prevented Russia's defeat.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » How?
maryishere wrote: » And the numerous Arctic convoys (, there were 78 convoys between August 1941 and May 1945 ), the battles in the Atlantic, N. Africa, Europe , the bombing raids launched on Germany etc did not help cause Hitlers defeat?
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Just adding some context. Without the USSR, Britain would not have been able to arm itself and regroup and would have been quickly defeated.
Fratton Fred wrote: » If Hitler had attacked Russia with the full might of his military, Russia would have been over whelmed. Keeping a western and north Africa front open, delayed and restricted the Nazi war machine.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Though what happened in Dresden was a crime against humanity.
maryishere wrote: » And indeed the USSR got loads of equipment from boots to planes from the UK. Quote: About 1400 merchant ships delivered essential supplies to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease program, escorted by ships of the Royal Navy, Royal Canadian Navy, and the U.S. Navy. Eighty-five merchant vessels and 16 Royal Navy warships (two cruisers, six destroyers, eight other escort ships) were lost. Nazi Germany's Kriegsmarine lost a number of vessels including one battleship, three destroyers and at least 30 U-boats as well as a large number of aircraft. The convoys demonstrated the Allies' commitment to helping the Soviet Union, prior to the opening of a Second Front, and tied up a substantial part of Germany's Navy and Air Forcehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_convoys_of_World_War_II The USSR contributed manpower and as we all know its casulties were horrendous.
maryishere wrote: » Agreed, but Germany bombed Coventry etc first, years previously. It reaped the whirlwind.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Its manpower was some 20,000,000 casualties. And the weather played its part.
indioblack wrote: » The claim was that Britain was beaten in 1940. I made no claim that Britain defeated Germany. The history should tell you that it was vital for Britain not to succumb in 1940-41. Britain made a not unimportant contribution to the war - I take it you wouldn't dispute that. Hitler had to get across the channel in 1940 - he couldn't - and never seemed to have any serious intention of doing so. Hitler considered Britain out of the game - he was already looking east. It's not a question of what if Russia hadn't fought Germany. What happened was Barbarossa - and the consequence of that was that the Red Army broke the back of the German army. My post was to rebut the claim that Britain was beaten - not what would happen if....
maryishere wrote: » So to help the bigger picture, the allies defeating Nazism, do you not agree Ireland should have joined the allies in 1944 / 45, and saved numerous lives in the N. Atlantic?
Professor Moriarty wrote: » That was also wrong. As was much of the war. However, 35,000 civilians died in Dresden but less than 600 died in Coventry.
indioblack wrote: » Over 43,000 died in Hamburg nearly two years earlier. Dresden was part of a schedule of bombing attacks on eastern German cities. The crime against humanity was the war - and both Allied and Axis powers had uncomfortable moral issues to address when it was over.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » No it certainly wasn't beaten. Like any army with its back against the wall, they came out fighting. They had no choice other than surrender.
maryishere wrote: » You are wrong again as usual. British and allied losses in the Atlantic in 1944 and 1945 was not as bad as a few years previously, but Germany was still a threat and there were 102 British ships lost in the Atlantic in 1944 and 45 in 1945.http://www.usmm.org/battleatlantic.html If Britain / USA / Canada had access to ports south of the border from say 1944 on, and could fly its patrols from the west / s.w. of Ireland, numerous lives would have been saved. From 1944 on, when it was clear Germany was in retreat and would not waste its scarce resources bombing Ireland. Belfast was bombed earlier in the war. As said before, what the Americans and Allied powers would have expected by the time of Roosevelts death in '45 was for Ireland to open up its ports to help the defenders of the Atlantic convoys. Hitler had invaded neutral countries early in the war : 1945 was time for us to thank the Allied powers for saving us from Nazism, and make some small contribution on an official basis. Countries chan and did change stance: Italy was an Axis power but on 8 September 1943, Italy joined the Allies as a co-belligerent. Ireland could have abandoned its shameful neutrality in 1944 or 1945 if it wanted to take the high moral ground on the world stage.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Indeed. However, and this is just conjecture, perhaps Hitler might have been defeated without Britain's involvement but defeat would have been far less likely without the USSR's involvement.
Fratton Fred wrote: » definitely, if Hitler didn't have his eyes firmly eastwards, Britain would have been toast. the latest figures claim 18-25,000 dead in Dresden, although the actual figure will never be known. Quite frightening.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Britain had no use for Irish ports
maryishere wrote: » Actually if it had access to Irish ports / airports, the Mid-Atlantic Gap ( a geographical term attributed to an undefended area beyond the reach of land-based RAF Coastal Command antisubmarine (A/S) aircraft during the Battle of the Atlantic in the Second World War ) would have been reduced in size considerably, saving countless British / Canadian / American and Irish lives, given there were Irishmen on many of those ships. 1945 was time for us to thank the Allied powers for saving us from Nazism, and make some small contribution on an official basis. In 1945 Germany was not in a position to strike against Ireland. Other English speaking countries in the world made valuable contributions towards defeating Nazism, instead of sending condolences on Hitlers death.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Churchills admirals told him they had no use for the ports Mary.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Warmongers typically don't understand the idea of neutrality.
FrancieBrady wrote: » It was and remains a valuable thing in the world.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Dev, under great pressure, bravely ensured that we can hold our heads high on that front,
maryishere wrote: » Wrong. In the anti-submarine war, Britains airplanes could have patrolled hundreds of miles further in to the Atlantic off s.west Ireland if that had use of an airport here. Also, Churchill directed Field Marshal Sir Bernard Montgomery to prepare plans to seize Cork and Queenstown (Cobh) so their harbours could be used as naval bases. However, better submarine-detecting technology, as well as military bases in Iceland, meant that the Irish ports were no longer as vital for the Allies as they had been during World War I, so Cobh was not retaken.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_neutrality_during_World_War_II
Correct. Look at the neutral countries invaded by Hitler....for example Denmark and Norway on 9 April 1940—then Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg on 10 May 1940. He sent their Jews , disabled, homosexuals and gypsies to the extermination camps. And you still think it was morally right for DeValera to send condolences on his death?
lol.
maryishere wrote: » ffs he insulted the 100,000 brave Irish people who volunteered to fight Hitler / Nazism and he was rightly criticised all around the world. I already gave you links to editorials in widespread different newspapers around the world. Not Irelands proudest hour.
maryishere wrote: » Yeah, the rest of the world was appalled as the conditions of Hitlers extermination camps were revealed ( thanks partly to the bravery of some Irish soldiers in allied uniforms ), other neutral countries such as Sweden and Switzerland did not send their condolences on the death of Hitler. Both our Taoiseach and President did...but shire the rest of the world did not understand. You miss the point because I quoted from the American Newspapers of the time, 1945 (which I named), and I used quotation marks. I do not know if the American printing presses used fadas in 1945 - I do anyone but you expected them to. And while I normally refer to this country as Ireland, I do not blame the American press for sometimes calling us Eire, considering we had that painted in large letters on our few ships, headlands etc - and even our currency and stamps. The Americans were well aware of the great help N. Ireland gave to the allied war effort, and indeed hundreds of thousands of their forces passed through N. Ireland on the way to Europe.
