|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 13, 2021 14:02:01 GMT
Of course I wrote them myself. Cool! I shall include them in the newsletter  Maybe later. Don't think two drabbles is enough. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 13, 2021 14:06:58 GMT
Cool! I shall include them in the newsletter Maybe later. Don't think two drabbles is enough. I meant you will feature and I would give only a specimen of that drabble |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 13, 2021 14:08:49 GMT
Maybe later. Don't think two drabbles is enough. I meant you will feature and I would give only a specimen of that drabble Define "specimen". I want to know what exactly I'm getting into. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 13, 2021 15:07:30 GMT
I meant you will feature and I would give only a specimen of that drabble Define "specimen". I want to know what exactly I'm getting into. Just some starting 4-5 lines |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 13, 2021 15:25:00 GMT
Define "specimen". I want to know what exactly I'm getting into. Just some starting 4-5 lines Sure, but don't know how you can fit the POD or any meaningful butterflies in 4-5 lines |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 13, 2021 15:28:07 GMT
Wilhelm Ritter Von Leeb could not believe what he had just heard. This could jeopardize the entire offensive towards Leningrad. "Generalfeldmarschall Leeb," repeated his chief of staff, Kurt Brennecke, "Colonel General Ernst Busch is reporting a large enemy counterattack at Staraya Russa. He does not believe 16th army can hold their position without reinforcements. Should we divert forces from the 4th Panzer Army to assist him?"... Want to know more? Visit the Alternate history thread now! This is what I am going to keep in newsletter. Are you getting it now HangryBird? |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 13, 2021 15:35:10 GMT
Wilhelm Ritter Von Leeb could not believe what he had just heard. This could jeopardize the entire offensive towards Leningrad. "Generalfeldmarschall Leeb," repeated his chief of staff, Kurt Brennecke, "Colonel General Ernst Busch is reporting a large enemy counterattack at Staraya Russa. He does not believe 16th army can hold their position without reinforcements. Should we divert forces from the 4th Panzer Army to assist him?"... Want to know more? Visit the Alternate history thread now! This is what I am going to keep in newsletter. Are you getting it now HangryBird ? Hmmm, it looks like introducing the background and context of the POD works well. Go ahead! |
|
|
|
Post by STILETT0 on Apr 14, 2021 0:23:12 GMT
If Japan somehow lost desicively against China, what do you think will happen in Asia Pacific. Japan didn't have China long enough to reap the supplies and benefits of so much land. To tell the truth, it just brought more troops away from the Pacific, fighting against an already demoralised and undersupplied army. If they lost, they would have had a better chance against the USA, even though they would inevitably lose. Having Yasuji Okamura and Shunroku Hata's armies could possibly break into India. Ultimately, it would have the Japanese better off if they sued for peace with the Chinese, and the Chinese Army will already be too fragile to demand Manchuria, so the Japanese would probably keep it. Ultimately, I believe that no war, or a defeat and later peace with the Chinese will actually stop the Japanese from overextending themselves too drastically, as overextension was the downfall of the Axis (except Italy lol). I'm not too good on this alternate history stuff, but this is my take. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 0:38:36 GMT
If Japan somehow lost desicively against China, what do you think will happen in Asia Pacific. Japan didn't have China long enough to reap the supplies and benefits of so much land. To tell the truth, it just brought more troops away from the Pacific, fighting against an already demoralised and undersupplied army. If they lost, they would have had a better chance against the USA, even though they would inevitably lose. Having Yasuji Okamura and Shunroku Hata's armies could possibly break into India. Ultimately, it would have the Japanese better off if they sued for peace with the Chinese, and the Chinese Army will already be too fragile to demand Manchuria, so the Japanese would probably keep it. Ultimately, I believe that no war, or a defeat and later peace with the Chinese will actually stop the Japanese from overextending themselves too drastically, as overextension was the downfall of the Axis (except Italy lol). I'm not too good on this alternate history stuff, but this is my take. I don't think they will attack America when they had lost against China and i forget to mention that the war which I was mentioning was 1895 one. |
|
|
|
Post by STILETT0 on Apr 14, 2021 0:49:01 GMT
Japan didn't have China long enough to reap the supplies and benefits of so much land. To tell the truth, it just brought more troops away from the Pacific, fighting against an already demoralised and undersupplied army. If they lost, they would have had a better chance against the USA, even though they would inevitably lose. Having Yasuji Okamura and Shunroku Hata's armies could possibly break into India. Ultimately, it would have the Japanese better off if they sued for peace with the Chinese, and the Chinese Army will already be too fragile to demand Manchuria, so the Japanese would probably keep it. Ultimately, I believe that no war, or a defeat and later peace with the Chinese will actually stop the Japanese from overextending themselves too drastically, as overextension was the downfall of the Axis (except Italy lol). I'm not too good on this alternate history stuff, but this is my take. I don't think they will attack America when they had lost against China and i forget to mention that the war which I was mentioning was 1895 one. Oh, lmao. I don't know too much abt that one. |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 14, 2021 6:25:54 GMT
Currently having writers block with Part 2 unfortunately. While I'm going to finish Leningrad or Bust! before starting any new drabbles, I'm thinking about doing a drabble about the Revolutions of 1848 or the Reconstruction Era. Need to branch out after writing a bunch of drabbles about Germany in WW2. I was originally only going to do two drabbles about said subject: one about the Germans fighting the Allies in the Mediterranean and another about them fighting the Soviets in the East. But Leningrad or Bust! turned out to be much longer than I anticipated.
|
|
|
|
Post by STILETT0 on Apr 15, 2021 0:24:08 GMT
Stalin did not wanted a war Germany till atleast 1943. If Germany decisively defeats RAF, then Britain will be pretty much defenseless as shown during Battle of France when Luftwaffe played important role in French Defeat by bombing allied Troops. all the British have to do is make Hitler mad, and he'll switch the airfields for civilian targets. OK, so I have done further research on this topic, and let me tell you this: The main reason Operation Sea Lion was not put forward because it would have been a logistical nightmare The Germans were great on land, but in the sea, especially the English Channel, the Royal Navy was the dominant figure. The Kriegsmarine had a few small "Pocket Battleships," to create a navy which abided by the weight quota for the Treaty Of Versailles, and they also had many, many submarines. Both of these will fail to defeat the Royal Navy in a decisive battle, really because their main tactic was guerilla warfare. Let alone escort ships. Meanwhile Raeder's navy was getting kicked around by Cunningham, while the Bismarck would not be able to defeat Pound and Mountbatten's fleets in one battle, which would be the case. Hitler would have to create a massive amount of planes and warships to so much as match the Royal Navy, as well as the RAF's resilience in general. Meanwhile, there's the research. The Higgins Boat was first presented to the US Government in 1940, while the Germans had two....yeah, A beach landing.... The best thing Albert Kesselring could do is commit to a large preliminary bombing of anti-air installations, and create a Crete on a 10x larger scale to secure the beachead for the landing forces. Then they will have to advance inland to an extremely determined army, protecting their home and life as they know it. Yeah.... HangryBird, Operation SeaLion still=impossible |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 15, 2021 0:35:09 GMT
all the British have to do is make Hitler mad, and he'll switch the airfields for civilian targets. OK, so I have done further research on this topic, and let me tell you this: The main reason Operation Sea Lion was not put forward because it would have been a logistical nightmare The Germans were great on land, but in the sea, especially the English Channel, the Royal Navy was the dominant figure. The Kriegsmarine had a few small "Pocket Battleships," to create a navy which abided by the weight quota for the Treaty Of Versailles, and they also had many, many submarines. Both of these will fail to defeat the Royal Navy in a decisive battle, really because their main tactic was guerilla warfare. Let alone escort ships. Meanwhile Raeder's navy was getting kicked around by Cunningham, while the Bismarck would not be able to defeat Pound and Mountbatten's fleets in one battle, which would be the case. Hitler would have to create a massive amount of planes and warships to so much as match the Royal Navy, as well as the RAF's resilience in general. Meanwhile, there's the research. The Higgins Boat was first presented to the US Government in 1940, while the Germans had two....yeah, A beach landing.... The best thing Albert Kesselring could do is commit to a large preliminary bombing of anti-air installations, and create a Crete on a 10x larger scale to secure the beachead for the landing forces. Then they will have to advance inland to an extremely determined army, protecting their home and life as they know it. Yeah.... HangryBird , Operation SeaLion still=impossible Pretty much yeah. Operation Sea Lion had no chance of success. But why did you tag me? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2021 1:05:24 GMT
all the British have to do is make Hitler mad, and he'll switch the airfields for civilian targets. OK, so I have done further research on this topic, and let me tell you this: The main reason Operation Sea Lion was not put forward because it would have been a logistical nightmare The Germans were great on land, but in the sea, especially the English Channel, the Royal Navy was the dominant figure. The Kriegsmarine had a few small "Pocket Battleships," to create a navy which abided by the weight quota for the Treaty Of Versailles, and they also had many, many submarines. Both of these will fail to defeat the Royal Navy in a decisive battle, really because their main tactic was guerilla warfare. Let alone escort ships. Meanwhile Raeder's navy was getting kicked around by Cunningham, while the Bismarck would not be able to defeat Pound and Mountbatten's fleets in one battle, which would be the case. Hitler would have to create a massive amount of planes and warships to so much as match the Royal Navy, as well as the RAF's resilience in general. Meanwhile, there's the research. The Higgins Boat was first presented to the US Government in 1940, while the Germans had two....yeah, A beach landing.... The best thing Albert Kesselring could do is commit to a large preliminary bombing of anti-air installations, and create a Crete on a 10x larger scale to secure the beachead for the landing forces. Then they will have to advance inland to an extremely determined army, protecting their home and life as they know it. Yeah.... HangryBird, Operation SeaLion still=impossible Who said Kriegsmarine had to defeat Royal Navy, it can be defeated by Luftwaffe if it had air supermacy. |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 15, 2021 1:16:20 GMT
OK, so I have done further research on this topic, and let me tell you this: The main reason Operation Sea Lion was not put forward because it would have been a logistical nightmare The Germans were great on land, but in the sea, especially the English Channel, the Royal Navy was the dominant figure. The Kriegsmarine had a few small "Pocket Battleships," to create a navy which abided by the weight quota for the Treaty Of Versailles, and they also had many, many submarines. Both of these will fail to defeat the Royal Navy in a decisive battle, really because their main tactic was guerilla warfare. Let alone escort ships. Meanwhile Raeder's navy was getting kicked around by Cunningham, while the Bismarck would not be able to defeat Pound and Mountbatten's fleets in one battle, which would be the case. Hitler would have to create a massive amount of planes and warships to so much as match the Royal Navy, as well as the RAF's resilience in general. Meanwhile, there's the research. The Higgins Boat was first presented to the US Government in 1940, while the Germans had two....yeah, A beach landing.... The best thing Albert Kesselring could do is commit to a large preliminary bombing of anti-air installations, and create a Crete on a 10x larger scale to secure the beachead for the landing forces. Then they will have to advance inland to an extremely determined army, protecting their home and life as they know it. Yeah.... HangryBird , Operation SeaLion still=impossible Who said Kriegsmarine had to defeat Royal Navy, it can be defeated by Luftwaffe if it had air superiority. If Germany commits itself to such a strategy, the Luftwaffe is going to need a lot more planes, a lot more pilots, a lot of more time to train said pilots. Additionally, Germany had very little capabilities in terms of naval air power; development of such capabilities was opposed by both the Luftwaffe and Kreigsmarine. |
|
