Comments by "John Burns" (@johnburns4017) on "German Exploitation of Occupied Industries - Effective?" video.

  1.  @AFT_05G  wrote: "USSR never outproduced USA during anytime of WW2." The USSR did - in 1942. Again... One point Prof Adam Tooze mentions, dismissing the myth that the USA provided all with everything, that in 1942 the USSR outproduced the USA. The USA provided about 11-12% of British supplies, mainly raw materials and machine tools (British War Production by Postan 1951). The USA supplied about 5$ of Soviet needs. The USA providing most of the materials for WW2 is greatly overstated.
    2
  2. Germany used coal for everything. It came from the Ruhr, where most heavy industry was. The prime transport mechanism was rail, using steam trains, that used coal, with steel wheels on steel rails, made using coal, so no imported rubber for tyres. Electricity was generated using coal. Coal for industry. Coal for steel making. Cutting off the Ruhr meant hitting the German war machine at its heart, starving it of manufacturing and energy. Cutting the Ruhr off was vital. The British saw this, especially Montgomery, wanting an allied thrust north, to turn right to isolate the Ruhr. Eisenhower wanted a broad front, which was totally ineffective. People will say, well from D-day to surrender it was only 11 months. However, it was only that short because the Germans gambled using much of their armour at the Battle of the Bulge, losing it shortening the war. They ran out of armour. The war could have been over by Christmas 1944 if Montgomery was left in charge of all ground forces. He would have seized the Ruhr - then its all over. Even German generals after WW2 agreed with Montgomery saying they could not have stopped a full allied thrust to the north. They could stop the thin allied line that stretched from Switzerland to the North Sea. The Ruhr was only captured a month before the end of the war. Eisenhower allowed the under resourced Market Garden to go ahead into the north. It was so small it only had one corps above Eindhoven as Eisenhower would not allocate the US First Army to move up on the right British flank. A total disgrace when looking at the level of allied forces in the ETO.
    1
  3.  @looinrims  * Monty was the most successful general in WW2. He had to take command of two shambolic US armies in the German Bulge attack . * Goodwood was a success. Monty drew onto the British the German armour, then wiped out 90% of it. * Rhur encirclement was not until the last weeks of the war. * Monty wanted a 40 division thrust to the north. The German generals said they could not have resisted it, saying the war being over by Christmas 1944. * US general were inexperienced and naive, prolonging the war. * You must not get your history from Hollywood.
    1
  4. After the fall of France, the Germans had access to the industry of Northern Italy, France, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, however were not able to use it to match either the Soviets or the British in war production. The success of the Royal Navy blockade was instrumental in starving Germany of vital resources and food both animal and human. French production of planes destined for Germany was minuscule. France was not capable to produce as pre-war as the French imported coal from Britain for its power generation. With the successful Royal Navy blockade the main source of coal was from Germany. Germany could not increase its production to overcome the French shortfall. The amount of food produced in continental Europe fell. The production of meat and dairy products in countries such as Denmark was dependant on imported grain and animal feed from the Americas. This was now not available. The level of food available from the dairy industry collapsed as did food production in general. In the rest of Europe food production had been based on chemical fertilizer. Huge levels of the chemicals used for fertilizer production were diverted to the manufacturing of explosives. Hence food production fell. French workers were on subsistence rations. Electricity was widely not available in France. The country had been dependant on motorized transportation. With no fuel and road & rail vehicles seized by the Germans, milk was poured away in farms and other produce put back into the ground unable to reach towns or cities. Most of French oil imports came from abroad. Once France fell oil products came from Romania and synthetic oil made in Germany, and so little it made little difference to the dire situation. The oil output was not enough for the needs of the German forces alone. France reverted to a horse and cart economy. The occupied countries were a drain on the German economy. The Italian navy threatened to suspend all operations in February 1941, well before the USSR and USA were in the war, unless Germany provided 250,000 tons of fuel oil due to the dire shortage because of the Royal Navy blockade on Europe. One point Prof Adam Tooze mentions, dismissing the myth that the USA provided all with everything, that in 1942 the USSR outproduced the USA.
    1
  5.  @looinrims  What don't you agree with by Prof Adam Tooze?
    1
  6.  @looinrims  Postan and Tooze are renowned resources. Respect them. * USA provided 11% of British materials, mainly raw materials and machine tools. The UK had imported great amounts from the USA pre war in normal trade - cereals, ores. Much of it via British companies set up in the US. When war broke out the USA said this normal trade was supplying the British war effort. * The British imported more goods and raw materials in 1938 than in 1941. Britain would buy overseas if it was cheaper to make at home. - Britain's War Machine by David Edgerton. * Do not get your history from Hollywood and bad History Channel documentaries.
    1
  7.  @looinrims  The British sourced its oil from Venezuela. Dutch Aruba, Trinidad and Iran, some from the USA. The USA was degraded as an unreliable source once war broke out in 1939. After the USA entered the war they expanded refining, offering oil to the British. They took it. The British refinery in Iran supplied the USSR, and allied forces in the Japanese war.
    1
  8.  @looinrims  Roosevelt and his team in late 1941 concluded that the British and USSR would defeat the Germans without USA intervention. A correct assumption.
    1
  9.  @looinrims  Most USA production, which was enormous, went to the USA. Get it out if your head that without USA production Britain and the USSR would not have won. Britain' output was phenomenal. Out-producing Germany on most counts, then Empire production on top - Canada's production was nothing sniff at. The British and Americans told the USSR to not bother with heavy bombers, or ships, as they would do that, so concentrate on the land war. The British had ample sticks of 100-octane fuel pre and early war, from its own sources, not USA, but the USA expanded its production so much it was not worth producing it in the UK. Britain over imported grain from the US that it created a rat problem. Secial poisons had to be developed to kerb the problem. Britain provided 31% of USA materials in the ETO, with 71% in 1942. The USA was a liability in 1942. The RAF had to curtail its bombing offensive as the had give bases over to the USAAF.
    1
  10.  @looinrims  Lend lease was that, it was lent. The equipment went back to the USA after. The British never kept it, if they did they paid after WW2. The rationale was that Britain was doing the fighting for the USA until they could gear up. So they will do some lending.
    1
  11.  @looinrims  You are quite tight I should not argue with stupid people who get their history from Hollywood.
    1