Recent comments in /f/history

ThePrussianGrippe t1_j44zl7u wrote

> Or they might decide it’s a great place to store gunpowder and the Venetians might decide to fire upon your gunpowder supplies to keep you from firing back at them, you know, hypothetically.

They say of the acropolis where the Parthenon is… that’d it’d make a bloody good armory.

12

Johnny_Monkee t1_j44qftl wrote

The German population was not mobilised like the Brits and Russians, for example. Women did not usually go to work in factories and some luxury goods were still being produced.

Also, they had somewhat warped priorities as they preferred to put a lot of resources into the Holocaust (and other chimerical fantasies) rather than use those resources in the war effort.

4

[deleted] t1_j44p514 wrote

It helps to substitute "war economy" with "full mobilization" of the war effort in Germany itself. That includes measures like mandatory employment for German women and the broadening of rationing as Speer directed what had been protected resources to keeping up arms production.

An ongoing, related question is why did the Allied bombing effort end up being so diffused as to targets and tactics? The Air Forces bitterly resisted the tactical use of bomb resources to attack French transportation infrastructure until Eisenhower threatened to quit in the build up to Overlord. Also, the industrial targets used in manufacturing were easy for the Germans to disperse. The one campaign that truly was hurting the Axis was against her oil production. I've read some felt had it been more of an overall priority Germany could not have fielded armies even with synthetic replacements in POL.

15