Quote:
Originally Posted by aspqrz
I also feel that you are cherry picking your objections ... indeed, creating them where they simply cannot stand, as in the matter of Japan in the Far East, ignoring the reality that if they attacked the Commonwealth and her allies they had to attack the US. I am not aware of any mainstream historian who supports that line of thought ... unless they're conspiracy theorists.
|
They attacked the Commonwealth in Asia/Pacific because they could see that Britain was unlikely to be able to significantly oppose Japanese forces or significantly reinforce the Commonwealth due to being heavily engaged against Germany and Italy in Europe, North Africa and the Med. They were in retrospect very accurate with that assessment, and their major blunder was to seriously underestimate American resolve and resources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspqrz
As far as a non-US WW2 goes, could the Commonwealth have won? Obviously, based on economics, the answer is yes. As I have repeatedly pointed out, and which you still don't seem to have fully understood, such a victory would have been neither fast nor cheap. Would it have caused economic stresses that could have had similar consequences to the American Revolution ... hell yes. Would that change the fact that the Commonwealth could/would have defeated Germany (aka 'won the war') ... IMO, no.
This is obviously where our main point of difference is.
Phil
|
The British Commonwealth could not have beaten Germany on its own.