kg_1007
Posts: 230
Joined: 4/19/2008 Status: offline
|
@ Flaviusx.. glvaca pointed out the key that I was saying, better than I did..I am not saying America would have thrown up its hands, or even that there would not have been another way found..what I am saying, is that it would have drastically altered the future course of the war. It likely would have taken until AFTER the war, even had the German side won, for THEM to have any benefit from Baku...but it would instantly have altered the Soviet side, and an attempt(you are correct, and attempts would have been made) to make up the lost resources on the part of the Americans, would have altered everything that happened in the west, and created many more serious questions there. To assume that the western powers, or the Soviets, either one, was perhaps not giving 100% effort already, and had some magical point where..if they lost a city, NOW..they will give 100% to correct for it, is, I am sorry, just insulting and ridiculous...and even though I am certain that is not your intent, if you step back, and see your argument from a neutral perspective, that is what you are saying..So..the USA effort, already maxed out, was somehow still not "giving their all"..but if the Soviets lost Baku,..NOW they are going to give 100%? edit: I also note this sentence.."I simply do not understand this myopic attempt at alternate history where the Western Allies stick to the historic script while events elsewhere take a different direction. " of yours as the same argument used by Axis supporters on this very forum, where it has been argued that if events in Russia (in game) take a different course than historical, why would one expect the same historic strategy(withdrawing units, TOE changes, etc) to be made by the (in game) German High Command.
< Message edited by kg_1007 -- 6/5/2012 4:44:17 AM >
|