Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
What was the point of Italy being involved anyway? And why don't they get any flack for it really?
On 10 June 1940, Mussolini sided with Germany, though he was aware that Italy did not have the military capacity in 1940 to carry out a long war with France and the United Kingdom.[4] Mussolini believed that after the imminent French surrender, Italy could gain territorial concessions from France and then he could concentrate his forces on a major offensive in Egypt, where British and Commonwealth forces were outnumbered by Italian forcesWhat was the point of Italy being involved anyway? And why don't they get any flack for it really?
But we only won Midway by accident. If McClusky hadn't gotten his squadron lost on the way to the battle, only to pop out of the cloud cover just as the Japanese fleet was refueling all their planes and reloading all their guns so they could chase our retreating fleet all the way back to Hawaii, the battle would have been the end of our involvement in the Pacific. McClusky took out 3 of the 4 Japanese fleet carriers in a ten-minute window by sheer luck, had ne not, we wouldn't have been able to mount that steady ### kicking all the way up the Pacific.That's not really true. Once Midway occurred, it was a steady ### kicking as our carriers routed their fleet across the Pacific.The US victory in the Pacific Theather was "by the skin of our teeth".Also, the Japs probably would have taken Hawaii next if we had stood down.
Roosevelt won his third term in 1940 in a landslide. The GOP actually made huge gains in the off-year elections of 1942 and came within a few seats of winning back the House for the first time since the stock market crash.I don't know that we would have gotten into it with Germany - we had a fair amount of prominent German sympathizers in our country and I would think that we would have made some sort of easy peace with them for their control over Europe and to leave us alone. We would have probably pushed to a more fascist state of affairs here as well and gone after the communist pretty hard here as well as abroad - maybe even helping Germany take on Russia. I agree with the other poster there is a good chance this "peace" would have eventually broken down over Middle East/African colonial impulses. It's the Japanese that were the wild card in all of this - I suppose we could have left Hawaii to them - but after the "surprise" attack all of the speculation regarding Germany goes out the window. It would have really made for an interesting election in 1942.
Uhhh...no. We'd already frozen Japan's assets after their adventures in mainland China. Bombing us was the inevitable result.America could have stayed out of the War by coming to an agreement with Japan, some sort of deal like the Nazi Soviet pact for the Pacific. Presumably that would mean Roosevelt would have lost the 1936 or 1940 election. The only reason Germany declared war was because Hitler assumed America would after Pearl Harbor any way, and it was an attempt to get Japan to do the same with Russia. Hitler's plan involved taking on the U.S. only after Russia and Britain were defeated.
The winner of the Russian and German War dominates Europe with a presumably mauled Britain in danger of being finally conquered by Russia or Germany. Would depend a lot on how much America gave to Japan in the pact or agreement. Some sort of three way cold war probably develops.
Once Germany declared war on the US, nobody here is going to accept peace terms.Roosevelt won his third term in 1940 in a landslide. The GOP actually made huge gains in the off-year elections of 1942 and came within a few seats of winning back the House for the first time since the stock market crash.I don't know that we would have gotten into it with Germany - we had a fair amount of prominent German sympathizers in our country and I would think that we would have made some sort of easy peace with them for their control over Europe and to leave us alone. We would have probably pushed to a more fascist state of affairs here as well and gone after the communist pretty hard here as well as abroad - maybe even helping Germany take on Russia. I agree with the other poster there is a good chance this "peace" would have eventually broken down over Middle East/African colonial impulses. It's the Japanese that were the wild card in all of this - I suppose we could have left Hawaii to them - but after the "surprise" attack all of the speculation regarding Germany goes out the window. It would have really made for an interesting election in 1942.
HAven't read the rest of the thread, but define "involved." We were supplying the allies with weapons and supplies for months while they were fighting in Europe. Are we still doing that?pantherclub said:For all you history buffs out there, what would have happened if the US never got involved in the war? The Axis would have never invaded us as it is logistically impossible for any country to come over here. Would we just have a weird truce with the Germany regime or what?
Not to mention the Japanese did occupy the Aleutians for a time. It was not theory; it was reality.HAven't read the rest of the thread, but define "involved." We were supplying the allies with weapons and supplies for months while they were fighting in Europe. Are we still doing that?pantherclub said:For all you history buffs out there, what would have happened if the US never got involved in the war? The Axis would have never invaded us as it is logistically impossible for any country to come over here. Would we just have a weird truce with the Germany regime or what?
And secondly, I dispute that germany and or japan would not have invaded our country. I think it's pretty easy to assume that if Europe became Germany-proper and most of south asia became Japan they would have enough reach and people to throw into the cannon fire to invade.
Sounds like we were invaded by the Japanese...In the Battle of the Aleutian Islands (June 1942-August 1943) during World War II (1939-45), U.S. troops fought to remove Japanese garrisons established on a pair of U.S.-owned islands west of Alaska. In June 1942, Japan had seized the remote, sparsely inhabited islands of Attu and Kiska, in the Aleutian Islands. It was the only U.S. soil Japan would claim during the war in the Pacific. The maneuver was possibly designed to divert U.S. forces during Japan's attack on Midway Island (June 4-7, 1942) in the central Pacific. It’s also possible the Japanese believed holding the two islands could prevent the U.S. from invading Japan via the Aleutians. Either way, the Japanese occupation was a blow to American morale. In May 1943, U.S. troops retook Attu and three months later reclaimed Kiska, and in the process gained experience that helped them prepare for the long "island-hopping" battles to come as World War II raged across the Pacific Ocean.
True, it was a war congress in a time where national unity was paramount. Pearl Harbor pushed this country way beyond the point where isolationism or appeasement were viable options. But the facts of the 1942 elections do run against the conventional wisdom that the country rallied behind FDR after Pearl Harbor, at least in political terms.Once Germany declared war on the US, nobody here is going to accept peace terms.Roosevelt won his third term in 1940 in a landslide. The GOP actually made huge gains in the off-year elections of 1942 and came within a few seats of winning back the House for the first time since the stock market crash.I don't know that we would have gotten into it with Germany - we had a fair amount of prominent German sympathizers in our country and I would think that we would have made some sort of easy peace with them for their control over Europe and to leave us alone. We would have probably pushed to a more fascist state of affairs here as well and gone after the communist pretty hard here as well as abroad - maybe even helping Germany take on Russia. I agree with the other poster there is a good chance this "peace" would have eventually broken down over Middle East/African colonial impulses. It's the Japanese that were the wild card in all of this - I suppose we could have left Hawaii to them - but after the "surprise" attack all of the speculation regarding Germany goes out the window. It would have really made for an interesting election in 1942.
Japan had industrial might already, their whole economy was already devoted to a world war that existed from the Indian Ocean to the Aleutians. they already had the most advanecd, maybe the only, military amphibian assault capability in the world at that time.Also would agree that a Japanese or German invasion of America is logistically improbable . Only the massive industrial might of America proved capable of supporting armies across the vastness of the Oceans.
Eephus - sorry I was trying to squeeze this in while doing something else - I guess my point is without a war effort under way (had the the Japanese stayed away - or at least not "surprised" in 41) The election would have been an argument over where we get involved and on whose side. A fair amount of industrialists in this country may have pushed the election against joining up with lost cause in England(which it may have been by November 42) versus joining with their German counterparts and taking on the Communists. We were pretty immature in World affairs even in 1940-1942 as an electorate and I don't know that many voters could have been persuaded to not go with the "winner". In retrospect it makes that landslide 1940 election by FDR a ultimate turning point in our history because it did repudiate the industrialists and the isolationists at the time.Roosevelt won his third term in 1940 in a landslide. The GOP actually made huge gains in the off-year elections of 1942 and came within a few seats of winning back the House for the first time since the stock market crash.I don't know that we would have gotten into it with Germany - we had a fair amount of prominent German sympathizers in our country and I would think that we would have made some sort of easy peace with them for their control over Europe and to leave us alone. We would have probably pushed to a more fascist state of affairs here as well and gone after the communist pretty hard here as well as abroad - maybe even helping Germany take on Russia. I agree with the other poster there is a good chance this "peace" would have eventually broken down over Middle East/African colonial impulses. It's the Japanese that were the wild card in all of this - I suppose we could have left Hawaii to them - but after the "surprise" attack all of the speculation regarding Germany goes out the window. It would have really made for an interesting election in 1942.
Oh, I definitely agree. Pearl Harbor pretty much nuked (no pun intended) the isolationist argument.True, it was a war congress in a time where national unity was paramount. Pearl Harbor pushed this country way beyond the point where isolationism or appeasement were viable options. But the facts of the 1942 elections do run against the conventional wisdom that the country rallied behind FDR after Pearl Harbor, at least in political terms.Once Germany declared war on the US, nobody here is going to accept peace terms.Roosevelt won his third term in 1940 in a landslide. The GOP actually made huge gains in the off-year elections of 1942 and came within a few seats of winning back the House for the first time since the stock market crash.I don't know that we would have gotten into it with Germany - we had a fair amount of prominent German sympathizers in our country and I would think that we would have made some sort of easy peace with them for their control over Europe and to leave us alone. We would have probably pushed to a more fascist state of affairs here as well and gone after the communist pretty hard here as well as abroad - maybe even helping Germany take on Russia. I agree with the other poster there is a good chance this "peace" would have eventually broken down over Middle East/African colonial impulses. It's the Japanese that were the wild card in all of this - I suppose we could have left Hawaii to them - but after the "surprise" attack all of the speculation regarding Germany goes out the window. It would have really made for an interesting election in 1942.
The nomination of dark horse Wendell Wilkie at the 1940 GOP convention played right into Roosevelt's hands. Wilkie didn't present a strong isolationist alternative to FDR and didn't have the full support of his party.Eephus - sorry I was trying to squeeze this in while doing something else - I guess my point is without a war effort under way (had the the Japanese stayed away - or at least not "surprised" in 41) The election would have been an argument over where we get involved and on whose side. A fair amount of industrialists in this country may have pushed the election against joining up with lost cause in England(which it may have been by November 42) versus joining with their German counterparts and taking on the Communists. We were pretty immature in World affairs even in 1940-1942 as an electorate and I don't know that many voters could have been persuaded to not go with the "winner". In retrospect it makes that landslide 1940 election by FDR a ultimate turning point in our history because it did repudiate the industrialists and the isolationists at the time.Roosevelt won his third term in 1940 in a landslide. The GOP actually made huge gains in the off-year elections of 1942 and came within a few seats of winning back the House for the first time since the stock market crash.I don't know that we would have gotten into it with Germany - we had a fair amount of prominent German sympathizers in our country and I would think that we would have made some sort of easy peace with them for their control over Europe and to leave us alone. We would have probably pushed to a more fascist state of affairs here as well and gone after the communist pretty hard here as well as abroad - maybe even helping Germany take on Russia. I agree with the other poster there is a good chance this "peace" would have eventually broken down over Middle East/African colonial impulses. It's the Japanese that were the wild card in all of this - I suppose we could have left Hawaii to them - but after the "surprise" attack all of the speculation regarding Germany goes out the window. It would have really made for an interesting election in 1942.
Sorry but just not seeing it. Invading mainland America would be a terribly daunting task logistically, It took the combined industrial might of Canada, Britain, and America to build a fleet up that could support the invasion of Europe, meaning a sustained conflict with an active enemy. Japan neither had the freighter fleet to sustain it or the industrial might to build a freighter fleet while fighting in China, India, maintaining a defense against Russia, and supporting the troops and navy fighting American forces. How many divisions would you need to invade and hold anything significant on the West Coast? 50 as a minimum, hopefully with a great deal motor transport and armor, to match the material that America would throw at such an invasion. Which brings up the fact that the Sherman tank was roughly as superior over Japanese tanks as German tanks were above American. A redesign of the armored force and building it from scratch would of been needed for long term success.Japan had industrial might already, their whole economy was already devoted to a world war that existed from the Indian Ocean to the Aleutians. they already had the most advanecd, maybe the only, military amphibian assault capability in the world at that time.Also would agree that a Japanese or German invasion of America is logistically improbable . Only the massive industrial might of America proved capable of supporting armies across the vastness of the Oceans.
Assuming they took Hawaii and the Aleutians (which they eventually did) it would have been easier for them to land in California than for us to move our infantry and firepower out there at the time. Our army would have been partly relying on mule transport, that's how bad it was.
try antony beever the second World War. Great overview of the whole thing.Not to sidetrack stuff, but where would be a good place to start (books and films) to study up on this?
Just read the first few pages of the intro., looks very promising. Thanks for the suggestion.try antony beever the second World War. Great overview of the whole thing.Not to sidetrack stuff, but where would be a good place to start (books and films) to study up on this?
Because we had them last time in WW1 - it was the Germans' turn.What was the point of Italy being involved anyway? And why don't they get any flack for it really?
sorry bad memory.Just read the first few pages of the intro., looks very promising. Thanks for the suggestion.* Oh, and it's Beevor.try antony beever the second World War. Great overview of the whole thing.Not to sidetrack stuff, but where would be a good place to start (books and films) to study up on this?
kInda like the littlest kid on the playground.Because we had them last time in WW1 - it was the Germans' turn.What was the point of Italy being involved anyway? And why don't they get any flack for it really?
I don't think there is any flack, because most attribute the decision to enter it to Mussolini, who ended up arrested and shot by his own citizens. By the end of the war, Italians were fighting with the allies against the Germans.What was the point of Italy being involved anyway? And why don't they get any flack for it really?
On the other hand Italy still has open fascists running around; I think Mussolini's granddaughter even got elected to the Parliament a few years back.I don't think there is any flack, because most attribute the decision to enter it to Mussolini, who ended up arrested and shot by his own citizens. By the end of the war, Italians were fighting with the allies against the Germans.What was the point of Italy being involved anyway? And why don't they get any flack for it really?
So are you saying that Pearl Harbor never happened, or that we didn't respond to Pearl Harbor?pantherclub said:For all you history buffs out there, what would have happened if the US never got involved in the war? The Axis would have never invaded us as it is logistically impossible for any country to come over here. Would we just have a weird truce with the Germany regime or what?
I know what you are saying but hypothetically we didnt have to get involved even after being attacked. I am glad we did but my main point is that the US could have never been invaded by a foreign army.Yes, however you want to describe it.After the bombing of Pearl Harbor we had to protect ourselves and via the Tripartite Pact, Germany had to protect Japan.SaintsInDome2006 said:No, Germany declared war on us.Would we just have a weird truce with the Germany regime...?
I think the OP is asking a question which could not be, it's not as if the USA went diving headfirst into WWII. The axis attacked the US.
Matty - I asked him that more or less and the above was his reply.So are you saying that Pearl Harbor never happened, or that we didn't respond to Pearl Harbor?pantherclub said:For all you history buffs out there, what would have happened if the US never got involved in the war? The Axis would have never invaded us as it is logistically impossible for any country to come over here. Would we just have a weird truce with the Germany regime or what?
If it's the later, what would that have shown the world about us/US?
If it's the former, I am very interested in that answer. Would we have ever joined the war if not for that attack?
Lend-Lease was an act of war. So was convoying supplies to England. So was occupying Iceland. The Germans chose not to respond for tactical reasons.So are you saying that Pearl Harbor never happened, or that we didn't respond to Pearl Harbor?pantherclub said:For all you history buffs out there, what would have happened if the US never got involved in the war? The Axis would have never invaded us as it is logistically impossible for any country to come over here. Would we just have a weird truce with the Germany regime or what?
If it's the later, what would that have shown the world about us/US?
If it's the former, I am very interested in that answer. Would we have ever joined the war if not for that attack?
I don't agree with this at all. The Japs ended up paying for it but it was a surprise attack carried out to the final degree, except for the noted lapses in leaving the fuel supplies and carriers intact, and maybe by not following up with an invasion of Hawaii.In hindsight Pearl Harbor was one of the greatest fiasco's in modern war history
Italian politics will still be crazy after WWIIIOn the other hand Italy still has open fascists running around; I think Mussolini's granddaughter even got elected to the Parliament a few years back.I don't think there is any flack, because most attribute the decision to enter it to Mussolini, who ended up arrested and shot by his own citizens. By the end of the war, Italians were fighting with the allies against the Germans.What was the point of Italy being involved anyway? And why don't they get any flack for it really?
We did have a blockade on scrap metal I believe, and that was a major problem for them.Lend-Lease was an act of war. So was convoying supplies to England. So was occupying Iceland. The Germans chose not to respond for tactical reasons.So are you saying that Pearl Harbor never happened, or that we didn't respond to Pearl Harbor?pantherclub said:For all you history buffs out there, what would have happened if the US never got involved in the war? The Axis would have never invaded us as it is logistically impossible for any country to come over here. Would we just have a weird truce with the Germany regime or what?
If it's the later, what would that have shown the world about us/US?
If it's the former, I am very interested in that answer. Would we have ever joined the war if not for that attack?
IMO, if Japan had not attacked us, we would have continued Lend-Lease to both Russia and England until the fall of Tobruk and Sebastopal in the late spring of 1942. At that point, FDR would have addressed the nation and stated that we could not stay out longer for the sake of our own national security, and he would have declared war on Nazi Germany.
As for Japan, we would have stayed neutral so long as the Japanese did not attack Singapore, Hong Kong, or the Philippines. If Japan attacked any of those, the USA would instantly have declared war.
The war ended 68 1/2 years ago. You really don't need to keep using the J-word.I don't agree with this at all. The Japs ended up paying for it but it was a surprise attack carried out to the final degree, except for the noted lapses in leaving the fuel supplies and carriers intact, and maybe by not following up with an invasion of Hawaii.In hindsight Pearl Harbor was one of the greatest fiasco's in modern war history
Ultimately the Japs needed and wanted the Phillipines because it was key to their supply routes, for the raw materials supplies in the islands, and because of the access to oil. If the Japs took that the USA had already determined they would attack to defend the Phillipines (and anyway we had naval bases there, they would have been attacking us anyway). So the Japs had to attack PH to take the Phillipines.
Their mistake was in assuming we would just sit that one out after losing the fleet.
Hm, ok, I can get on board with this, but first I just want to know, can I call the gerrys "krauts"?The war ended 68 1/2 years ago. You really don't need to keep using the J-word.I don't agree with this at all. The Japs ended up paying for it but it was a surprise attack carried out to the final degree, except for the noted lapses in leaving the fuel supplies and carriers intact, and maybe by not following up with an invasion of Hawaii.In hindsight Pearl Harbor was one of the greatest fiasco's in modern war history
Ultimately the Japs needed and wanted the Phillipines because it was key to their supply routes, for the raw materials supplies in the islands, and because of the access to oil. If the Japs took that the USA had already determined they would attack to defend the Phillipines (and anyway we had naval bases there, they would have been attacking us anyway). So the Japs had to attack PH to take the Phillipines.
Their mistake was in assuming we would just sit that one out after losing the fleet.
If it's any consolation, I'm of French ancestry. I hereby give you permission to call them Frenchies, frogs, or rifle droppers.Hm, ok, I can get on board with this, but first I just want to know, can I call the gerrys "krauts"?The war ended 68 1/2 years ago. You really don't need to keep using the J-word.I don't agree with this at all. The Japs ended up paying for it but it was a surprise attack carried out to the final degree, except for the noted lapses in leaving the fuel supplies and carriers intact, and maybe by not following up with an invasion of Hawaii.In hindsight Pearl Harbor was one of the greatest fiasco's in modern war history
Ultimately the Japs needed and wanted the Phillipines because it was key to their supply routes, for the raw materials supplies in the islands, and because of the access to oil. If the Japs took that the USA had already determined they would attack to defend the Phillipines (and anyway we had naval bases there, they would have been attacking us anyway). So the Japs had to attack PH to take the Phillipines.
Their mistake was in assuming we would just sit that one out after losing the fleet.
Thank you, I will sprinkle these in liberally.If it's any consolation, I'm of French ancestry. I hereby give you permission to call them Frenchies, frogs, or rifle droppers.Hm, ok, I can get on board with this, but first I just want to know, can I call the gerrys "krauts"?The war ended 68 1/2 years ago. You really don't need to keep using the J-word.I don't agree with this at all. The Japs ended up paying for it but it was a surprise attack carried out to the final degree, except for the noted lapses in leaving the fuel supplies and carriers intact, and maybe by not following up with an invasion of Hawaii.In hindsight Pearl Harbor was one of the greatest fiasco's in modern war history
Ultimately the Japs needed and wanted the Phillipines because it was key to their supply routes, for the raw materials supplies in the islands, and because of the access to oil. If the Japs took that the USA had already determined they would attack to defend the Phillipines (and anyway we had naval bases there, they would have been attacking us anyway). So the Japs had to attack PH to take the Phillipines.
Their mistake was in assuming we would just sit that one out after losing the fleet.
My mother spent 2 1/2 years in an internment camp for Japanese-Americans.Hm, ok, I can get on board with this, but first I just want to know, can I call the gerrys "krauts"?The war ended 68 1/2 years ago. You really don't need to keep using the J-word.I don't agree with this at all. The Japs ended up paying for it but it was a surprise attack carried out to the final degree, except for the noted lapses in leaving the fuel supplies and carriers intact, and maybe by not following up with an invasion of Hawaii.In hindsight Pearl Harbor was one of the greatest fiasco's in modern war history
Ultimately the Japs needed and wanted the Phillipines because it was key to their supply routes, for the raw materials supplies in the islands, and because of the access to oil. If the Japs took that the USA had already determined they would attack to defend the Phillipines (and anyway we had naval bases there, they would have been attacking us anyway). So the Japs had to attack PH to take the Phillipines.
Their mistake was in assuming we would just sit that one out after losing the fleet.
Well, I do completely and fully apologize.My mother spent 2 1/2 years in an internment camp for Japanese-Americans.Hm, ok, I can get on board with this, but first I just want to know, can I call the gerrys "krauts"?The war ended 68 1/2 years ago. You really don't need to keep using the J-word.I don't agree with this at all. The Japs ended up paying for it but it was a surprise attack carried out to the final degree, except for the noted lapses in leaving the fuel supplies and carriers intact, and maybe by not following up with an invasion of Hawaii.In hindsight Pearl Harbor was one of the greatest fiasco's in modern war history
Ultimately the Japs needed and wanted the Phillipines because it was key to their supply routes, for the raw materials supplies in the islands, and because of the access to oil. If the Japs took that the USA had already determined they would attack to defend the Phillipines (and anyway we had naval bases there, they would have been attacking us anyway). So the Japs had to attack PH to take the Phillipines.
Their mistake was in assuming we would just sit that one out after losing the fleet.
The thread would be Lies about FDR
If Germany had taken over all of Europe and didn't declare war toward the beginning, I'm not so sure invading us would be impossible at some point.The US could have never been invaded. Its was impossible at the time.
Yup. If Germany had done that one the east, and Japan controlled the Pacific in the west (specifically Hawaii), I'm not sure that we couldn't have been invaded on both coasts at the same time.If Germany had taken over all of Europe and didn't declare war toward the beginning, I'm not so sure invading us would be impossible at some point.The US could have never been invaded. Its was impossible at the time.
Because the English Channel is extremely narrow. And even then we barely managed it. Panther club is probably right. Invasion would have been very unlikely. But isolated, surrounded by enemies, unable to trade, we would have been forced to surrender world domination to the Axis. And since they would have developed nukes eventually, along with rockets before we did, we would have been screwed.Yup. If Germany had done that one the east, and Japan controlled the Pacific in the west (specifically Hawaii), I'm not sure that we couldn't have been invaded on both coasts at the same time. If we had the ability to invade the beaches of Normandy, why wouldn't they have the ability to do the same?If Germany had taken over all of Europe and didn't declare war toward the beginning, I'm not so sure invading us would be impossible at some point.The US could have never been invaded. Its was impossible at the time.
Because Atlantic Ocean is a little wider than the Straights of Normandy/English Channel?Yup. If Germany had done that one the east, and Japan controlled the Pacific in the west (specifically Hawaii), I'm not sure that we couldn't have been invaded on both coasts at the same time.If Germany had taken over all of Europe and didn't declare war toward the beginning, I'm not so sure invading us would be impossible at some point.The US could have never been invaded. Its was impossible at the time.
If we had the ability to invade the beaches of Normandy, why wouldn't they have the ability to do the same?
We were around a decade away from developing long-range strategic bombers and ICBMs so there would be potential concerns other than an amphibious landing.Yup. If Germany had done that one the east, and Japan controlled the Pacific in the west (specifically Hawaii), I'm not sure that we couldn't have been invaded on both coasts at the same time.If Germany had taken over all of Europe and didn't declare war toward the beginning, I'm not so sure invading us would be impossible at some point.The US could have never been invaded. Its was impossible at the time.
If we had the ability to invade the beaches of Normandy, why wouldn't they have the ability to do the same?
The Germans, with Werner Von Braun, would have gotten ICBMs before us.We were around a decade away from developing long-range strategic bombers and ICBMs so there would be potential concerns other than an amphibious landing.Yup. If Germany had done that one the east, and Japan controlled the Pacific in the west (specifically Hawaii), I'm not sure that we couldn't have been invaded on both coasts at the same time. If we had the ability to invade the beaches of Normandy, why wouldn't they have the ability to do the same?If Germany had taken over all of Europe and didn't declare war toward the beginning, I'm not so sure invading us would be impossible at some point.The US could have never been invaded. Its was impossible at the time.
"Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down?The Germans, with Werner Von Braun, would have gotten ICBMs before us.We were around a decade away from developing long-range strategic bombers and ICBMs so there would be potential concerns other than an amphibious landing.Yup. If Germany had done that one the east, and Japan controlled the Pacific in the west (specifically Hawaii), I'm not sure that we couldn't have been invaded on both coasts at the same time. If we had the ability to invade the beaches of Normandy, why wouldn't they have the ability to do the same?If Germany had taken over all of Europe and didn't declare war toward the beginning, I'm not so sure invading us would be impossible at some point.The US could have never been invaded. Its was impossible at the time.