The Instigator
Skeptic111
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
Clarity
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Germany could have won WWII if they had limited their expansion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Skeptic111
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/8/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 645 times Debate No: 45486
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

Skeptic111

Pro

I would like to open for Debate the topic of whether Germany could have won World War II if it had limited it's expansion to France and Poland, and had not attempted to overtake Britain and the world.
Clarity

Con

I accept. This shall be interesting.
Debate Round No. 1
Skeptic111

Pro

Thank you for accepting to debate!
I will argue that Germany could have won WWII if they had limited their advancement to the continent only, and had not attacked Britain. Here are supporting facts:

1. Germany easily overtook the whole European continent in 3 years, with a far superior military, and tactics. All of Europe and North Africa was under axis command by 1941. Italy had a sympathetic dictator, Spain had a sympathetic dictator. The rest of Europe was overwhelmed by the German forces. France, Poland, Austria, and all the Germanic countries but for Sweden and Switzerland, who were both neutral and not threats. Germany had a pact with Russia to split Poland. Europe was securely in Axis control by 1941.
http://www.learnnc.org...

2. Originally Hitler only sought to control the Continent, and leave the British Empire intact. Let the British rule the rest of the world, and Germans rule the continent. In 1940 Britain attempted to defend France, but left hastily in retreat, and left behind most of their heavy machinery leaving the Isles relatively defenseless.
This probably emboldened Hitler to attack Britain, rather than leave it alone.

3. If Germany had held the European position, and had left Britain alone at this point, they would have retained all of European continent. By attacking Britain, they drew the Americans into Europe.

4. There is absolutely no doubt that the Americans were responsible for the victory in Europe, and that Britain could not have continued to defend itself against Hitler. Britain was struggling to survive, and had little military defense before America came to defend.

5. The United States had little interest in defending all of Europe, and would have left Europe under Nazi command had the Nazis not invaded the British Isles.

In conclusion, it was German over-confidence and under-estimation of the Anglo-American alliance which caused them to change plans, thereby drawing America into the war. Stalin was basically a opportunist, and joined the Allies, but was not interested in liberating Europe.
Clarity

Con

Clarity forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Skeptic111

Pro

In light of my opponent forfeiting round 2, I will let my previous argument stand. I could add supporting evidence in this round, but I don't think it would be fair, as the previous round has not been addressed yet.

Clarity

Con

Clarity forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
looks interesting
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
When you invade France, Britain will always be there to help 'em. Therefore, war with Britain was unavoidable
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by wierdman 3 years ago
wierdman
Skeptic111ClarityTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Skeptic111ClarityTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.
Vote Placed by Subutai 3 years ago
Subutai
Skeptic111ClarityTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.