Recent comments in /f/history

PhasmaFelis t1_j7mffvc wrote

Reply to comment by iMattist in Would the Allies have kept fighting if the axis powers stopped? by Techno-87

I'm curious what might have happened if Germany had decided to surrender wholesale to the Western Allies instead of trying to fight to the end. Certainly would have been easier on the civilians, relatively speaking. Is there any chance the Soviets would have respected that? Or would it have rolled straight into a war of Germany+Western Allies vs. USSR?

1

ThomasEdmund84 t1_j7mfa88 wrote

Reply to Would the Allies have kept fighting if the axis powers stopped? by Techno-87

I'm no expert but I believe the military strategy of the time was to disarm/demilitarize/occupy as necessary to ensure that a hostile enemy was unable or unlikely to be aggressive. So for the allies it probably would have been unlikely to accept a truce because there would be this forever issue of worrying about aggression.

Germany had already shown themselves to not only be unappeased but also unpredictable - its not inaccurate that Hitler was shown to be delusional and foolish in his decisions. Germany should of surrendered much earlier but instead sent children to defend Berlin because Hitler was that adverse to any admission of defeat.

Hitler had a weird perspective on Britain, he kinda liked the UK and probably would have considered a truce while I imagine he continued to push Russia - but again hard to trust.

1

Matti-96 t1_j7mf6br wrote

Reply to Would the Allies have kept fighting if the axis powers stopped? by Techno-87

Napoleon also tried to stop the multiple wars and coalitions he and his French Empire had to fight once he had achieved his aims. Britain decided they didn't like that idea so they kept forming new coalitions against Napoleon and were fighting the French Empire were reasonably possible (Portugal/Spain in the Peninsular Wars).

Different century, different country, same principle. Once Churchill rallied the UK, it became a war to death with Britain having more experience at winning those wars.

Plus, the German economy would have imploded by 1941, which is why they had to start the war by 1939, conquering new territory and sacking it to keep their economy running. Britain could fight a long war, Germany couldn't.

In 1940 the UK had 2 paths ahead of them in fighting the war, slowly by trading within the British Empire and the Sterling area or quickly by buying from the USA. Buying from the USA also had the advantage of influencing the US towards helping the UK, similar to WW1. They chose the quick path, gambling that Hitler would do something stupid by 1942, such as declaring war on the Soviets or Americans.

1

MRCHalifax t1_j7md3ng wrote

Reply to comment by iMattist in Would the Allies have kept fighting if the axis powers stopped? by Techno-87

> At the end of the war it was a mad rush to take as much territory as possible before the Russians.

It was kind of the opposite in general. Eisenhower was urged by a number of his people to keep heading east, but he was pretty content to mostly stop at the previously agreed upon demarcation line. The end of the war might have been less bloody if he has pressed on. At the end, the Germans were surrendering to the Allies in the hundreds of thousands, and in some cases fighting their way west specifically to surrender to the Allies rather than to the Soviets. But the Germans fought to the bitter end against the Soviets.

19

MrMoogyMan t1_j7mbl83 wrote

Reply to comment by cliff99 in Would the Allies have kept fighting if the axis powers stopped? by Techno-87

I agree. There are oil fields in eastern Russia but they weren't well developed then. They would have never been able to sustain an occupation of the territory in the USSR while holding the rest of their gains in China and SW Asia against the Allies. Maybe the US may have just entered the war on its own at that point. Roosevelt was certainly convinced that war was on the way, and prepared as well as he could for it. Pearl Harbor was basically a gift to the US government for public support against Japan.

9

dittybopper_05H t1_j7m80cn wrote

Reply to Best condensed history works? by SintagmaNominalMan

If you want a really condensed but relatively accurate, funny, and easy to read solution, might I suggest Larry Gonick's work:

The Cartoon History of the Universe - From the Big Bang to Alexander the Great (Volumes 1-7)

The Cartoon History of the Universe II - From the Springtime of China to the Fall of Rome (Volumes 8-13)

The Cartoon History of the Universe III - From the Rise of Arabia to the Renaissance (Volumes 14-19)

He also has a 2 volume History of the Modern World.

2

MeatballDom t1_j7m7eo5 wrote

Reply to comment by chicken_nugget08 in Weekly History Questions Thread. by AutoModerator

Are you thinking of Gorgias? We don't have that text anymore, just people discussing it, and there's some debate on whether it was something he believed or if it was just a mind exercise.

You could be thinking of "the only thing I know is that I know nothing" which is commonly believed to have been said by Socrates, but it's really not the case (though a bit complicated) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing

You might have luck at r/askphilosophy/ as well

2