wdolson
Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006 From: Near Portland, OR Status: offline
|
If the Germans had the resources, they would have done it too. The US and Russia both had all the raw materials they needed within their territory as well as a large population base to draw workers from. Another key bonus was both the US and USSR could position their factories out of range of enemy aircraft (the US by natural geography and the USSR by herculian effort). Germany had limited access to oil, and they had to import the high quality iron ore to make the best armor from. Sweden has an abundance of this ore, but they still had to pay hard currency to get it. Germany is a much smaller country with more limited human resources. They had large pools of slave labor, but people working for their own country are far better motivated. Germany tried to get by on the whizz bang factor, but it's difficult to fight a 3 on 1 war with two enemies who can each field more tanks, troops, artillery, and planes than your entire army can. The US military has gone a bit down the whizz bang route. During the cold war, the US figured it would be outnumbered, so built a military that could get more bang for every buck. If playing defense against a Russian invasion of Western Europe, they probably would have held their own, but nothing makes up for boots on the ground when it comes to taking and holding hostile territory. Bill
_____________________________
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer 
|