Refresh Comments
Anonymous comments allowed.
57 comments displayed.
#2
-
ompalomper ONLINE (01/08/2016) [-] ok, you have seen it so if you want to, please sell it to me because i think it seems like complete ameriwank **** .
oh, there are tapes from a different reality where the allies won
so ******* what? this takes place in a world where the axis won. they control the world. they have Europe in a iron grip, a generation of americans who accept and enjoy life under nazi rule, have colonized the moon and are doing manned exploration of mars.
oh but there will be an uprising
no it ******* won't. Europe in a iron grip, that has changed Europe for the better most likely (economically and industrially) and control the entire east coast and have a generation raised on nazi culture and education. not a ******* chance there will be an uprising.
but with proof of the holocaust...
if the series follows the book in any meaningful way then it should be a well known fact for anyone knowledgable in history and in the upper class that not only did they kill all the jews, they killed all the slavs, they killed all the gypsies, they slaughtered the majority of the blacks in Africa and enslaved the rest. SLAVERY IS OK in this world. why the **** would the new generation give a **** about the holocaust?
am i wrong? am i missing something? is it really only about an insignificantly small resistance group that think that they can "fix" the world? defeat the nazi empire that now span 3 continents? IS THERE ******* TIME/DIMENSION TRAVEL GOING ON!?
oh, there are tapes from a different reality where the allies won
so ******* what? this takes place in a world where the axis won. they control the world. they have Europe in a iron grip, a generation of americans who accept and enjoy life under nazi rule, have colonized the moon and are doing manned exploration of mars.
oh but there will be an uprising
no it ******* won't. Europe in a iron grip, that has changed Europe for the better most likely (economically and industrially) and control the entire east coast and have a generation raised on nazi culture and education. not a ******* chance there will be an uprising.
but with proof of the holocaust...
if the series follows the book in any meaningful way then it should be a well known fact for anyone knowledgable in history and in the upper class that not only did they kill all the jews, they killed all the slavs, they killed all the gypsies, they slaughtered the majority of the blacks in Africa and enslaved the rest. SLAVERY IS OK in this world. why the **** would the new generation give a **** about the holocaust?
am i wrong? am i missing something? is it really only about an insignificantly small resistance group that think that they can "fix" the world? defeat the nazi empire that now span 3 continents? IS THERE ******* TIME/DIMENSION TRAVEL GOING ON!?
#110 to #2
-
ChewyConor ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] I thought the premise was pretty meh and the idea of the whole revolution against tyranny was somewhat farfetched, although it has happened before (French revolution for example) and a tape showing people that the Nazi ideology isn't the only 'right' way to live (if it even is at all) could be trigger enough to make people rebel.
That said, I do agree its not likely. My interest was more piqued by the idea that as soon as the Nazis are done mopping up the American half-assed rebellion, they'll turn on the Japanese and start a war for full world domination, one the Japanese will almost certainly lose. I'm interested to see how the Japanese play their hand in this situation. The character interactions are also pretty interesting to watch develop.
On another note, I also like the idea of a story set in a reality which could have come about, just happened not to. It gives the story artistic freedom to go anywhere and have almost any outcome, rather than just following some story from history or set in a total fantasyland.
I thought the acting, visuals, portrayal of the setting, and the acoustic effects were all pretty good.
However many legitimate complaints you might have which I would likely agree, I enjoyed watching it.
That said, I do agree its not likely. My interest was more piqued by the idea that as soon as the Nazis are done mopping up the American half-assed rebellion, they'll turn on the Japanese and start a war for full world domination, one the Japanese will almost certainly lose. I'm interested to see how the Japanese play their hand in this situation. The character interactions are also pretty interesting to watch develop.
On another note, I also like the idea of a story set in a reality which could have come about, just happened not to. It gives the story artistic freedom to go anywhere and have almost any outcome, rather than just following some story from history or set in a total fantasyland.
I thought the acting, visuals, portrayal of the setting, and the acoustic effects were all pretty good.
However many legitimate complaints you might have which I would likely agree, I enjoyed watching it.
#100 to #2
-
angelusprimus (01/09/2016) [-] They didn't kill all the slavs.
Croats, Bosnians and Bulgarians were allied and part of the Reich.p, and ukrainians and Polaks were made into slave nations (much reduced). Czechs were germanized and declared Aryans.
Croats, Bosnians and Bulgarians were allied and part of the Reich.p, and ukrainians and Polaks were made into slave nations (much reduced). Czechs were germanized and declared Aryans.
#69 to #63
-
ompalomper ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] yes but that is exactly my point. a small resistance movement against an empire spaning half the planet and it's ally the other empire that rules the other half.
what is the point? there is no victory to be found here. not even the merest shadow of the possibility. the only, ONLY way for the resistance to win is if the divergence point (Roosevelt's murder before he became president) was the result of a nazi time machine and the plot will revolve around preventing the murder from taking place. and that is a stupid ******* plot.
the other possibility i see is that the tapes are somehow from our universe, some form of dimensional gate or window or whatever and the plot revolves around getting support from our world. which is an even MORE retarded plan.
what is the point? there is no victory to be found here. not even the merest shadow of the possibility. the only, ONLY way for the resistance to win is if the divergence point (Roosevelt's murder before he became president) was the result of a nazi time machine and the plot will revolve around preventing the murder from taking place. and that is a stupid ******* plot.
the other possibility i see is that the tapes are somehow from our universe, some form of dimensional gate or window or whatever and the plot revolves around getting support from our world. which is an even MORE retarded plan.
#72 to #69
-
thefates (01/09/2016) [-] Or maybe the plot revolves around trying to get people to see how much better life could be. The one thing that never changes is the fact that human beings want more than what they have. If that can be achieved by overthrowing those in power and people see this than organizing a revolution becomes rather easy.
That's the significance that the tapes hold in the show. They're not a means to fight back. They're a means to show people why they need to.
That's the significance that the tapes hold in the show. They're not a means to fight back. They're a means to show people why they need to.
#37 to #2
-
thesecretbear (01/09/2016) [-] >Is their time travel involved
SERN and the council of 300 were behind it all!
SERN and the council of 300 were behind it all!
#25 to #2
-
levvy (01/09/2016) [-] The book was written under the idea that without the Americucks the Nazis would have won. But that's nonsense. In reality the Soviet Union would have won easy. The American propaganda machine makes up stories about the lend lease in the East and the aid in the West. Nothing more than fantasy world BS. These did nothing on the grand scale of things.
Putin himself said that the Soviet army had 15 million troops mobilized in world war 2 out of the possible 34 million that could be mobilized.
Americucks make these propaganda films/books all the time. Because a lie told often enough becomes the truth, and the United States was built on a lie.
Putin himself said that the Soviet army had 15 million troops mobilized in world war 2 out of the possible 34 million that could be mobilized.
Americucks make these propaganda films/books all the time. Because a lie told often enough becomes the truth, and the United States was built on a lie.
#112 to #25
-
angelusprimus (01/09/2016) [-] And without Allied military help... what would Soviets use to shoot Germans with?
Do a bit of research and see how many hundreds of thousands of tons of war materiel came to USSR from the Allies.
Without resources Soviets would have been pushed a lot farther east. And then once Germans developed nuclear weapons, it would be over.
Do a bit of research and see how many hundreds of thousands of tons of war materiel came to USSR from the Allies.
Without resources Soviets would have been pushed a lot farther east. And then once Germans developed nuclear weapons, it would be over.
#39 to #25
-
eminesser (01/09/2016) [-]
But without US involvement, Japan would most likely have dominated East Asia and could launch an invasion of the USSR from the east/south east. I'm fairly certain that all ressources and soldiers of the USSR were allocated to their western front (as in the Eastern Front). Could they have held up against both Germany and Japan?
Furthermore, if you count the deliveries of foods and materials by ship to the UK as US involvement, the UK probably wouldn't have resisted Germany as much as it did
Furthermore, if you count the deliveries of foods and materials by ship to the UK as US involvement, the UK probably wouldn't have resisted Germany as much as it did
#27 to #25
-
ompalomper ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] That is complete ******** and you know it. The only real tactic the ussr had was throwing bodies at the German war machine until their blood and bones got caught in the gears. Without the allies being a thorn in the side (they would quickly fall without US support) Germany would focus all attention on Russia and completely wiped the floor with them til the ural's.
But muh scorched earth. Them supply lines.
A fair point. But still, with the entire attention of the Germans that problem could have been circumvented even by brute force.
But muh scorched earth. Them supply lines.
A fair point. But still, with the entire attention of the Germans that problem could have been circumvented even by brute force.
#60 to #27
-
cptsweatpants (01/09/2016) [-] He does have a point even if it wasn't his intention. Russia was the country to win second world war. Not the western allies. With the exception of the Battle of Britain going on, Hitler had the entire europe conquered or on his side by the time he attacked Russia. And they turned him back. And it wasn't until after Stalingrad and Kursk that the western front was opened, by then the soviets were already pushing germany back for quite some time.
#38 to #27
-
anon (01/09/2016) [-]
what makes you think that Hitler would've even attacked Russia? Russia wasn't looking to attack Germany until they were made to, sure it wasn't the most peaceful alliance but it was a solid nonagression pact.
Europeans love to throw around the idea that they could've won without America but even if for some stupid reason hitler started a two front war when Russia didn't have a reason to support the allies, Europe would've been destroyed. because Russia wouldn't take half of germany and stop if the western front hadn't made progress.
Europeans love to throw around the idea that they could've won without America but even if for some stupid reason hitler started a two front war when Russia didn't have a reason to support the allies, Europe would've been destroyed. because Russia wouldn't take half of germany and stop if the western front hadn't made progress.
#29 to #27
-
levvy (01/09/2016) [-] You are brainwashed and you don't know it.
"The only real tactic the ussr had was throwing bodies at the German war machine until their blood and bones got caught in the gears - they would quickly fall without US support"
I'm going to guess you are a subhuman by the hollywood tier propaganda you are spewing out.
Putin is right and you are wrong, Russia won the war with no help. This is history. Americucks just want the glory. **** off with you LGBT propaganda btw.
"The only real tactic the ussr had was throwing bodies at the German war machine until their blood and bones got caught in the gears - they would quickly fall without US support"
I'm going to guess you are a subhuman by the hollywood tier propaganda you are spewing out.
Putin is right and you are wrong, Russia won the war with no help. This is history. Americucks just want the glory. **** off with you LGBT propaganda btw.
#31 to #28
-
ompalomper ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] God dammit I didn't look at the username.
I took that bait Hook, line and sinker.
I took that bait Hook, line and sinker.
#115 to #31
-
captchakid ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] He wasn't using a smug anime face, thats why you didn't catch it.
#21 to #11
-
mrwalkerfour ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] they didnt mount a land invasion as such, they nuked washington, in this universe the US went the same way as japan, where it was either surrender or face every major city being nuked until you do. and if the US didnt surrender thats what would happen and then the US would be ill equiped to fight back agaisnt an invasion.
they dropped nukes and the US surrendered
they dropped nukes and the US surrendered
#14 to #11
-
mossjesus (01/09/2016) [-]
wasn't the whole point that Germany beat us to nukes by a big margin,pretty sure being able to **** a nuke on somebody who has almost no way to retaliate on the same level a pretty solid victory in fact America may not have been able to land invade japan(a smaller country by far), even our land invasion plan involved some degree of nuclear warfare
#26 to #14
-
ompalomper ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] Well, as I know of the book, it started with the us being under weak leadership and not lending support to the Europe allies. This meant that Germany completely crushed the allies and Russia. Japan was the first to attack the US destroying the entire pacific fleet in a much more devastating Pearl Harbor attack. The Germany then invaded the east coast and japan the west. Faced with overwhelming force, the US surrender.
If this would have happened, there would be no question about the superiority of the German war machine. The nazies where researching into jets, long distance ballistic missiles and nukes during the war. Without the strife of a losing war and the breathing room a subjugated Europe would give them they would most likely have finished the research and completely dominated the battlefield. Jets against the planes, ballistic missiles with several times the range of the furthest artillery and nukes. With Germany already geared in a war focused economy and the US weak and facing a two front war with a populace not ready for it the war for the Americas would likely last about two years max.
If this would have happened, there would be no question about the superiority of the German war machine. The nazies where researching into jets, long distance ballistic missiles and nukes during the war. Without the strife of a losing war and the breathing room a subjugated Europe would give them they would most likely have finished the research and completely dominated the battlefield. Jets against the planes, ballistic missiles with several times the range of the furthest artillery and nukes. With Germany already geared in a war focused economy and the US weak and facing a two front war with a populace not ready for it the war for the Americas would likely last about two years max.
#65 to #26
-
anticitezenone ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] >Destroying the entire Pacific Fleet
That's what the ******* Japanese THOUGHT THEY DID FOR ***** SAKE
They did Pearl Harbor because they were sure that would give them 100% control of the Pacific, but the Americans just said **** it, and used their ******* huge ass industry to repair everything and make more, better ships
The Japanese were doomed from the start and would have lost anyway, and the Americans would sooner make peace with the Germans than ******* surrender, since the Germans could literally do nothing about it, they had no blue water navy of any description.
There would be no 2 front war, since only the Japanese could possibly even begin a land invasion, and even then they'd ******* lose since it'd be Operation Downfall multiplied by however bigger America is compared to Japan
>Overwhelming force from a cross-ocean invasion
***** you what? Do you even know what the phrase "Logistical Nightmare" means? Germany would have to somehow produce the same amount of cargo ships as America and then mobilize all of that **** ACROSS AN OCEAN WHERE THE AMERICANS HAVE ******* 10X BIGGER NAVY and then drop their **** there
Imagine D-Day, x1000, the defender had previous knowledge, and then had ******* destroyers in the water before it even happened
******* idiots
That's what the ******* Japanese THOUGHT THEY DID FOR ***** SAKE
They did Pearl Harbor because they were sure that would give them 100% control of the Pacific, but the Americans just said **** it, and used their ******* huge ass industry to repair everything and make more, better ships
The Japanese were doomed from the start and would have lost anyway, and the Americans would sooner make peace with the Germans than ******* surrender, since the Germans could literally do nothing about it, they had no blue water navy of any description.
There would be no 2 front war, since only the Japanese could possibly even begin a land invasion, and even then they'd ******* lose since it'd be Operation Downfall multiplied by however bigger America is compared to Japan
>Overwhelming force from a cross-ocean invasion
***** you what? Do you even know what the phrase "Logistical Nightmare" means? Germany would have to somehow produce the same amount of cargo ships as America and then mobilize all of that **** ACROSS AN OCEAN WHERE THE AMERICANS HAVE ******* 10X BIGGER NAVY and then drop their **** there
Imagine D-Day, x1000, the defender had previous knowledge, and then had ******* destroyers in the water before it even happened
******* idiots
#109 to #65
-
angelusprimus (01/09/2016) [-] Actually, real Pearl Harbor attack was much reduced from the original plan.
In the book they went with an original plan, where attack lasted for two weeks. Not couple of hours, two weeks. Completely destroying not just the fleet but all the shipbuilding capability on the east coast. So USA was left with no fleet, and no way to build one. With Japanese taking Hawaii, and constant repeat attacks as americans tried to rebuild the shipyards.
On the other hand, Germans built the troop transports only, nothing else. And then nuked Washington DC and New York and told USA that they will keep nuking all the large cities if USA doesn't surrender.
With no fleet, no way to prevent nuclear bombardments since Germans used ballistic missiles, with entire leadership and 90% of military leadership killed off, USA surrendered.
All that happened in 1950, after Europe and East Asia were already fallen and USA spent entirety of that time avoiding war and doing absolutely no military buildup.
So yeah, its actually very well thought out. I'm sorry it offends your MURRICA! sense.
In the book they went with an original plan, where attack lasted for two weeks. Not couple of hours, two weeks. Completely destroying not just the fleet but all the shipbuilding capability on the east coast. So USA was left with no fleet, and no way to build one. With Japanese taking Hawaii, and constant repeat attacks as americans tried to rebuild the shipyards.
On the other hand, Germans built the troop transports only, nothing else. And then nuked Washington DC and New York and told USA that they will keep nuking all the large cities if USA doesn't surrender.
With no fleet, no way to prevent nuclear bombardments since Germans used ballistic missiles, with entire leadership and 90% of military leadership killed off, USA surrendered.
All that happened in 1950, after Europe and East Asia were already fallen and USA spent entirety of that time avoiding war and doing absolutely no military buildup.
So yeah, its actually very well thought out. I'm sorry it offends your MURRICA! sense.
#122 to #109
-
anticitezenone ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] >Actually, real Pearl Harbor attack was much reduced from the original plan.
******* what?
******* Yamamoto himself, the guy who ******* PLANNED THE ATTACK OF PEARL HARBOR said that it was extremely risky and had to be done perfectly otherwise they'd be ****** .
This is a quote from Yamamoto himself:
“Should hostilities once break out between Japan and the United States, it would not be enough that we take Guam and the Philippines, nor even Hawaii and San Francisco. To make victory certain, we would have to march into Washington and dictate the terms of peace in the White House. I wonder if our politicians (who speak so lightly of a Japanese-American war) have confidence as to the final outcome and are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices.”
Pearl Harbor was an attack of desperation by the Japanese, since they basically had no oil because the Americans had such a firm grasp of oil in the Pacific. ******* YAMAMOTO ADVISED AGAINST THE ******* ATTACK.
Also, do you even have the slightest idea of how a land invasion would go down? Look at Operation Downfall, the proposed invasion of Japan: 6.5 Million Allied deaths. And that's against a down and out Japan, not the ******* Industrial Powerhouse USA. Nukes don't do ******* **** if they're shot down before they can be dropped, idiot
******* what?
******* Yamamoto himself, the guy who ******* PLANNED THE ATTACK OF PEARL HARBOR said that it was extremely risky and had to be done perfectly otherwise they'd be ****** .
This is a quote from Yamamoto himself:
“Should hostilities once break out between Japan and the United States, it would not be enough that we take Guam and the Philippines, nor even Hawaii and San Francisco. To make victory certain, we would have to march into Washington and dictate the terms of peace in the White House. I wonder if our politicians (who speak so lightly of a Japanese-American war) have confidence as to the final outcome and are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices.”
Pearl Harbor was an attack of desperation by the Japanese, since they basically had no oil because the Americans had such a firm grasp of oil in the Pacific. ******* YAMAMOTO ADVISED AGAINST THE ******* ATTACK.
Also, do you even have the slightest idea of how a land invasion would go down? Look at Operation Downfall, the proposed invasion of Japan: 6.5 Million Allied deaths. And that's against a down and out Japan, not the ******* Industrial Powerhouse USA. Nukes don't do ******* **** if they're shot down before they can be dropped, idiot
#126 to #122
-
angelusprimus (01/10/2016) [-] THERE
WAS
NO
*******
LAND
INVASION
YOU
UNBELIEVABLE
MURRICAN
MORON.
How the **** would nukes be ******* shot down? HOW DO YOU SHOOT DOWN A BALLISTIC MISSILE WITH CCA 1920ies ERA MILITARY TECHNOLOGY??!?!?!?
Are you suffering from a superiority complex so ******* much you can't ******* even understand that IT WAS NOT OUR WW2 militarized USA. It was an USA from alternate universe where Roosevelt was killed and instead of him we had leadership that was rabidly isolationist and anti interventionist. Which defunded the military and refused to help Allies in Europe.
How were they supposed to shoot down ballistic missiles Germans were shooting at them? Actually, how the **** would OUR 1950 USA shoot down ballistic missiles? Even today's best technologies are iffy on taking down missiles.
I am always amazed how the **** you murrican assholes just refuse to see anything but "MURRICA WINS ALWAYS!"
In the book USA surrenders because war means extinction. Germans would cover east coast in nuclear waste, Japs would do same on the east coast and that would take care of 85% of the population. If they also took down the rust belt, that would take care of 95% of american industry. So how the **** would USA fight? Throw rocks at them?
WAS
NO
*******
LAND
INVASION
YOU
UNBELIEVABLE
MURRICAN
MORON.
How the **** would nukes be ******* shot down? HOW DO YOU SHOOT DOWN A BALLISTIC MISSILE WITH CCA 1920ies ERA MILITARY TECHNOLOGY??!?!?!?
Are you suffering from a superiority complex so ******* much you can't ******* even understand that IT WAS NOT OUR WW2 militarized USA. It was an USA from alternate universe where Roosevelt was killed and instead of him we had leadership that was rabidly isolationist and anti interventionist. Which defunded the military and refused to help Allies in Europe.
How were they supposed to shoot down ballistic missiles Germans were shooting at them? Actually, how the **** would OUR 1950 USA shoot down ballistic missiles? Even today's best technologies are iffy on taking down missiles.
I am always amazed how the **** you murrican assholes just refuse to see anything but "MURRICA WINS ALWAYS!"
In the book USA surrenders because war means extinction. Germans would cover east coast in nuclear waste, Japs would do same on the east coast and that would take care of 85% of the population. If they also took down the rust belt, that would take care of 95% of american industry. So how the **** would USA fight? Throw rocks at them?
#128 to #126
-
anticitezenone ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] >Devolving into ad hominem
jesus christ dude calm down
Also, America just doing nothing even though there's 2 massive powers that are likely to start ******** on them would never happen, even if they were Isolationist they aren't ******* suidicidal. First thing they'd ******* focus on is anti-ICBM arrays to deploy around the coasts, then they're ******* hunky dory
Oh and good luck getting the midwest to go along with a complete surrender to anyone
jesus christ dude calm down
Also, America just doing nothing even though there's 2 massive powers that are likely to start ******** on them would never happen, even if they were Isolationist they aren't ******* suidicidal. First thing they'd ******* focus on is anti-ICBM arrays to deploy around the coasts, then they're ******* hunky dory
Oh and good luck getting the midwest to go along with a complete surrender to anyone
#130 to #128
-
angelusprimus (01/10/2016) [-] Actually one of the points of the book is that USA was so unprepared because people in charge thought exactly as you do.
"They would never attack us, land attack on USA would be impossible."
So they built defenses against land attack and thought themselves absolutely secure. And then Germans developed nuclear weapons.
"They would never attack us, land attack on USA would be impossible."
So they built defenses against land attack and thought themselves absolutely secure. And then Germans developed nuclear weapons.
#129 to #128
-
angelusprimus (01/10/2016) [-] Anti ibcm arrays.
In 1950. Before integrated circuit technology.
Sure. And then they would train american bald eagles to fly the missiles back at Germans.
Because that's about as realistic as intercepting a flying missile, you don't know is coming, without a computer technology.
In 1993 interception systems vs. 1950ies era missiles had 82% chance of interception.
So yeah, that would have worked incredibly well.
And take out... say Chicago, Kansas City and Detroit with weapons they have NO WAY of fighting back. And promise them to burn and irradiate all the fields if they don't surrender and the surrender as well as anyone.
Americans are not suicidal idiots. We know when to surrender as well as anyone else. No one wants to die or have their children grow up in irradiated wasteland.
In 1950. Before integrated circuit technology.
Sure. And then they would train american bald eagles to fly the missiles back at Germans.
Because that's about as realistic as intercepting a flying missile, you don't know is coming, without a computer technology.
In 1993 interception systems vs. 1950ies era missiles had 82% chance of interception.
So yeah, that would have worked incredibly well.
And take out... say Chicago, Kansas City and Detroit with weapons they have NO WAY of fighting back. And promise them to burn and irradiate all the fields if they don't surrender and the surrender as well as anyone.
Americans are not suicidal idiots. We know when to surrender as well as anyone else. No one wants to die or have their children grow up in irradiated wasteland.
#131 to #129
-
anticitezenone ONLINE (01/10/2016) [-] Why is it assumed that America had no ICBM of their own? Surely they would have done the same thing that Russia did in the cold war, just stockpile a ******** of nukes and then face MAD constantly.
Hell, even if America had no German scientists, espionage would ******* skyrocket, and immigration into the German Reich would be near impossible to detect who's the spy and who's not
Honestly that'd be much more interesting, a Cold War between America and Germany
Hell, even if America had no German scientists, espionage would ******* skyrocket, and immigration into the German Reich would be near impossible to detect who's the spy and who's not
Honestly that'd be much more interesting, a Cold War between America and Germany
#132 to #131
-
angelusprimus (01/10/2016) [-] Russia developed a nuclear bomb in 1949. That is 5 years after USA. With stolen data from USA.
In this world USA was probably working on their bomb, but Germany only developed it a year earlier. There was no time. To create such a weapon it takes time even if you have the data. And they didn't start earlier, because they weren't in a war, they thought themselves secure, and didn't want to spend millions on a weapon that's probably impossible. (until WW2 nuclear weapons were theoretical and most scientists thought they were either impossible or use of one would ignite the atmosphere)
Cold war between America and Germany is a cool idea. It was done well in Robert Harris' Fatherland, Harry Turtledove's In the Presence of Mine Enemies. Though both show mostly the Germany in this world. (and its not doing all that well)
Here is the thing, would invasion of USA be something that could have happened in our history? No. Not after 19th century, not with our leadership.
But the point of this alternate world is, lets find situation in which USA takes THE most self indulgent, isolationist way, and goes down due to inaction and superiority complex.
It would have taken a massive change, but its well thought out and it works.
Honestly, I think alternate worlds in which USA becomes Nazi due to internal politics more likely. Nazis had a strong following in USA before WW2. They lacked a leader.
In this world USA was probably working on their bomb, but Germany only developed it a year earlier. There was no time. To create such a weapon it takes time even if you have the data. And they didn't start earlier, because they weren't in a war, they thought themselves secure, and didn't want to spend millions on a weapon that's probably impossible. (until WW2 nuclear weapons were theoretical and most scientists thought they were either impossible or use of one would ignite the atmosphere)
Cold war between America and Germany is a cool idea. It was done well in Robert Harris' Fatherland, Harry Turtledove's In the Presence of Mine Enemies. Though both show mostly the Germany in this world. (and its not doing all that well)
Here is the thing, would invasion of USA be something that could have happened in our history? No. Not after 19th century, not with our leadership.
But the point of this alternate world is, lets find situation in which USA takes THE most self indulgent, isolationist way, and goes down due to inaction and superiority complex.
It would have taken a massive change, but its well thought out and it works.
Honestly, I think alternate worlds in which USA becomes Nazi due to internal politics more likely. Nazis had a strong following in USA before WW2. They lacked a leader.
#127 to #121
-
angelusprimus (01/10/2016) [-] Without destroying our shipbuilding capabilities they had no chance.
Our industry was just too strong.
It doesn't matter how well you fight if your opponent can drop five times as many soldiers, ships and aircraft into the fray.
IF they took down our shipbuilding ability, and then took philiphines and hawaii they would have had strategic command of the pacific, and base from which to keep harrasing our rebuilding, and that would have given them time to later sue for peace, maybe give back hawaii in return for keeping most of the pacific.
But leaving us ability to build, that pretty much ended the war right there.
Our industry was just too strong.
It doesn't matter how well you fight if your opponent can drop five times as many soldiers, ships and aircraft into the fray.
IF they took down our shipbuilding ability, and then took philiphines and hawaii they would have had strategic command of the pacific, and base from which to keep harrasing our rebuilding, and that would have given them time to later sue for peace, maybe give back hawaii in return for keeping most of the pacific.
But leaving us ability to build, that pretty much ended the war right there.
#73 to #68
-
anticitezenone ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] Oh yeah, not to mention that Hitler had no plans to attack the US since that's ******* SUICIDE
#89 to #78
-
anticitezenone ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] >Doing a land invasion is the same as going to war with someone
Go away anon
Go away anon
#15 to #14
-
anticitezenone ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] >Nuke a city or 3 in the coastal US
>Through Atlantic coast guard, carriers and coastal air bases since nukes had to be dropped through conventional bombing
>Not to mention that Germany never made a heavy bomber that could hold a nuke
>And even if 5 major cities were nuked on the atlantic, there's still no way the Germans could get farther than the coast due to literally everyone having a gun
>Against a country with a perfectly self-sustainable economy, including Canada's oil
Literally no, nukes against America would have as much effect on the US as a bombing campaign across the Atlantic that would never happen for a multitude of reasons
It's a stupid ******* hypothetical
>Through Atlantic coast guard, carriers and coastal air bases since nukes had to be dropped through conventional bombing
>Not to mention that Germany never made a heavy bomber that could hold a nuke
>And even if 5 major cities were nuked on the atlantic, there's still no way the Germans could get farther than the coast due to literally everyone having a gun
>Against a country with a perfectly self-sustainable economy, including Canada's oil
Literally no, nukes against America would have as much effect on the US as a bombing campaign across the Atlantic that would never happen for a multitude of reasons
It's a stupid ******* hypothetical
#23 to #15
-
limberlarry (01/09/2016) [-]
You dont get it, america surrendered there was no land invasion. Its an alternate timeline where germany developed nukes and long range bombers, america gave up rather than be nuked into oblivion
#123 to #66
-
limberlarry (01/10/2016) [-]
What part of "Nuke them from beyond range of retaliation" are you struggling to understand?
#18 to #15
-
rocketpropelledtit (01/09/2016) [-]
I agree with you. Invading American is similar to invading Russia in the winter, just with less historical testing.
#91 to #18
-
anticitezenone ONLINE (01/09/2016) [-] At least there's one person who understands, bunch of mindless red thumbers
#124 to #91
-
rocketpropelledtit (01/10/2016) [-]
I stand by my point. The amount of firearms and angry nationalists would make it hell.
