Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25

Thread: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Aachen/Aken/Aix-la-Chapelle
    Posts
    2,966

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Quote Originally Posted by overlord644 View Post
    interesting point, if America was to nuke Germany late in the war (say post market-garden) was their anywhere on German soil that they could bomb and not risk fallout effecting other already liberated countries?
    I don't know about the power of the first a-bombs back then and how far the fall-out would spread but there are actually no major cities in the center of Germany, maybe Hanover and Frankfurt (sorry, Drake). But after all the danger of contaminating liberated countries, own troops or even russian troops (just imagine...), who entered german soil in October 1944, would have been enormous.
    "I just ran out of ammo. I will ram this one. Good bye, we'll meet in Valhalla." - Major Heinrich Ehrler, April 4, 1945

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,274

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Quote Originally Posted by flamethrowerguy View Post
    I don't know about the power of the first a-bombs back then and how far the fall-out would spread but there are actually no major cities in the center of Germany, maybe Hanover and Frankfurt (sorry, Drake). But after all the danger of contaminating liberated countries, own troops or even russian troops (just imagine...), who entered german soil in October 1944, would have been enormous.
    Probably not.


    INITIAL ENTRY - RADIOLOGICAL SURVEY
    3.2
    It was recognized that entry into the atomic-bombed cities of Hiro-
    shima and Nagasaki might expose the occupation troops to residual radiation
    resulting from the nuclear detonations. Therefore, with the concurrence of
    General George Marshall, Chief of Staff, and General Douglas MacArthur,
    Theater Commander, a special scientific group was organized by the Manhattan
    Engineer District. The primary objective of this group was to insure that
    occupation troops would not be subjected to any possible “toxic” effects. The
    group consisted principally of medical personnel headed by Col. Stafford L.
    Warren (U.S. Army Medical Corps) and civil and electrical engineers. In order
    to survey these areas as quickly as possible, the group was split. One-half of
    the group was in Nagasaki from 20 September to 6 October; the other half was
    in Hiroshima from 3 to 7 October 1945. The group reported that the radiation
    levels in both cities were very low and that these levels would not present a
    hazard to the occupation forces.2
    http://www.dtra.mil/documents/rd/DNATR805512F.pdf

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Aachen/Aken/Aix-la-Chapelle
    Posts
    2,966

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rising Sun* View Post
    Like I said I am surely no experts but do you know about the later lifes of these people? How old they grew and what diseases they got? Didn't they tell these poor G.I.s at Nevada in October/November 1951 (Operation Buster-Jangle) they were not in any danger? Not to mention good ol' John Wayne's fate here...
    "I just ran out of ammo. I will ram this one. Good bye, we'll meet in Valhalla." - Major Heinrich Ehrler, April 4, 1945

  4. #19
    colonel hogan Guest

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Semper Fi View Post
    I think if Hitler did not use the last of his army in the Ardan offincive that they may have been able to win the war. But maybe not.



    What do you think.
    i dont think so the japanese were out of supplies and the germans were wiped out

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    8

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    The thing about the nuclear devices they had built had issues
    FAT MAN was built with components that had a half-life of 45 days. After that time, half the said elements would have deteriorated enough to cause problems with the chain reaction.
    LITTLE BOY was primitive, dirty. It could be easily mass produced, but the mess it made when it was fired. Plus with two pieces of Uranium that close together and the plane crashes, or the charge was accidentally fired, would have consequences beyond imagination. FAT MAN was more manageable, components could be left out, preventing the device from going critical, similar to the accidents at Mars Bluff and Spain.
    Groves pushed Truman to drop the devices on Japan as soon as they were built, so they could be proven as weapons and not have any fizzles due to radioactive decay.

    8 months, in that time jet fighters would have came into being over Europe, both German and American. Lockheed's Skunk Works put together the Gray Ghost, the P-80 Shooting Star and had several in England by V-E Day. It would have given the ME262 a run for the money, given post-war testing of mock dogfights between the two aircraft had them nearly evenly matched. Only thing that would have made the difference there would have been the pilots manning them.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    8

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Quote Originally Posted by colonel hogan View Post
    i dont think so the japanese were out of supplies and the germans were wiped out
    The Japanese had supplies, but experienced manpower they did not.
    The rotation system their armed forces had, to put it frankly, SUCKED!

    You were in the Jap Combined Fleet, you were in it for the long haul, you got sick, you went to their wardroom and got better, then went back to duty. Reference to that were two key command staffers before the Battle of Midway. One had his appendix removed, the other influenza. They were on their respective carriers when they were hit by US attack planes.
    There was no rotation system in place, you lived, you fought, you died. You didn't go back to the Island and trained others, you left that to your aging instructors.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Welwyn, UK
    Posts
    31

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Wow!!

    Sanity check here. Berlin was intended to be the first A-Bomd target.

    Is that correct?

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    8

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Terry_214 View Post
    Wow!!

    Sanity check here. Berlin was intended to be the first A-Bomd target.

    Is that correct?
    No, and this was a political decision made by Truman.
    Gen. Groves had some major influence in the decision making process, but Pres. Truman made the decision to use the devices on Japan.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    West Lafayette Indiana
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Quote Originally Posted by flamethrowerguy View Post
    I don't know about the power of the first a-bombs back then and how far the fall-out would spread but there are actually no major cities in the center of Germany, maybe Hanover and Frankfurt (sorry, Drake). But after all the danger of contaminating liberated countries, own troops or even russian troops (just imagine...), who entered german soil in October 1944, would have been enormous.
    I had some nuclear weapons training back in the 1980s. Drawing from the unclassified parts of that & open sources such as Encyclopedia Britannica I can say it would depend on if the bomb were detonated at low altitude or on the ground.

    The tests in the US and Pacific were mostly surface or underground detonations. The bombs at Hiroshima & Nagasaki were detonated at medium altitude. In those two cases the 'fireball' or globe of superheated gases did not touch the ground. A shock wave of very hot and compressed air did strike the ground & that is what collapsed the buildings, killed people, started a firestorm much like that at Osaka or Hamburg & many other cities. Because of the altitude of the detonation the shockwave of compressed air hit the landscape downwards or at a angle, which crushed or rolled object across the ground.

    In the case of the surface detonations two very different things happened. First the superheated gas or plasma made contact with the ground which turned the soil & other material into a fine dust that was carried upwards with the fireball & dispersed in the wind at high altitude. This is the most dangerous fallout as it is highly radioactive. The fine particals are easily asorbed by breathing, drinking contaminated water, or eating food that has it on the surface or has been asorbed by the living plant. This is the "Fallout" that causes the most damage as it spreads widely and is asorbed into the body where it causes continuing damage. The Second thing is the material that is in contact with the core of the detonation, but not vaporized is irradiated and then tossed about the landscape. This debris ranging from sand size to tons in weight is also impregnated with dangerous isotope particals. While it will not be asorbed into the body handling it or coming into close proximity will result in radiation poisoning. This material will be found tossed across the landscape several kilometers from the detonation.

    At Hiroshima & Nagasaki the airbursts led to the ground directly under or adjacent to be contaminated, but as there was no soil or other material vaporized and carried aloft the fallout was insignificant. A few kilos of water & dust already in the air & caught by the fireball would be all.

    The reason for the Hiroshima/Nagasaki detonations at altitude is that it provides the maximum 'blast' effect across the ground. Compression waves directed down towards the ground cause a more widespread destruction than those reflected upwards off the ground. This is one of several reasons why we often chose airbursts for our artillery attacks. In the case of the A bombs used on Japan the design was for airburst only. had they hit the ground the mechanism would have been wrecked and a low order detonation occured.

    An A bomb attack on a target in Germany would for the same reasons have most likely been a airburst. The requirements for creating a high order detonation made a contact detonating Abomb difficult in 1945, and there would be the object of flattening as many kilometers of landscape as possible. So, there would have been very little Fallout drifting across the country side.

    Quote Originally Posted by ;131341
    Like I said I am surely no experts but do you know about the later lifes of these people? How old they grew and what diseases they got? Didn't they tell these poor G.I.s at Nevada in October/November 1951 (Operation Buster-Jangle) they were not in any danger? Not to mention good ol' John Wayne's fate here...
    In the case of the "GIs" and the USN personnel contaminated in Operation Crossroads the the people who ordered them into the contaminated zones usually did not know themselves. Othen they were present alongside the men, as iggnorant as everyone else. The lack of knowledge of the effect of radiation on the human body is somewhat forgotton. Even the Physicists who worked directly with the radioactive material were fairly iggnorant about what was 'safe' and what was not. It took another fifteen years before the knowledge & experince came to a level where the danger was completely understood. Surface tests were still conducted through the 1950s. Those lifted hundreds of thousands of kilos of contaminated dust into the atmosphere, to be blown across the US and the Atlantic fisheries. Frequently a dangerous level of residue reached Western Europe.

    If you search the bookstores or online there are a lot of good books on various aspects of nuclear weapons and contamination.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Paramilitary wing of CAMRA
    Posts
    4,099

    Default Re: 1944, If the war lasted another 8 monthsm, would we have lost the war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nighthawke View Post
    No, and this was a political decision made by Truman.
    Gen. Groves had some major influence in the decision making process, but Pres. Truman made the decision to use the devices on Japan.
    Not exactly - the war with Germany was over by the time the weapons were ready, so Trumany hardly took a decision to spare Germany...
    I have neither the time nor the inclination to differentiate between the incompetent and the merely unfortunate - Curtis E LeMay

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •