A 1944 911:Empire State Building Collapses

Nonny · Feb 2, 2004

In 1944 a Junkers 390 flew to within 15 miles of New York.
If they had been available, how would the 6,000 mile range Messerschmit, Junkers and Focke Wulf "Amerika Bombers" have been deployed? From where would they have flown? Singly or in numbers? How much bomb load? What would have been the likely targets? How would the USA have responded defence-wise?
Although Kamikaze type suicide wasn't quite in the Nazi mentality, what would have been the effect of such a plane flying right into the Empire State Building? At the very least the diversion of 100s of 90mm AA guns for home defence, guns which in OTL played a major part in ground mode in stopping the Germans last throw in the Battle of the Bulge!

tom · Feb 3, 2004

I have heard that the reason the WTC collapsed was some peculiarity of the construction. Would the ESB actually fall?

Michael E Johnson · Feb 3, 2004

On the surface this would be a propaganda victory for the Nazis-The great German luftwaffe striking and destroying one of America's symbols (maybe they target and destroy the Stature of Liberty as well) . Goebbels would milk this for all that it was worth.In the long run however it would backfire on Germany.An actual Nazi attack on American soil that killed hundreds of people could have potentially aroused a much more negative view of Germany and Germans in the US as Pearl Harbor did with Japan and Japanese-Americans .This could have lead to attacks against German-American citizens and a harsher view towards Germany post -war-maybe the Morgenthau plan is put into effect to a certain extent? Not likely with the Soviets looming to the East -but who knows.

Beck Reilly · Feb 3, 2004

Michael E Johnson said:
....could have aroused a much more negative view of Germany and Germans in the US as Pearl Harbor did with Japan and Japanese-Americans .This could have lead to attacks against German-American citizens.

I doubt it. It was relatively easy to persecute a small group, such as the Japanese-Americans, who are roughly a third of one percent of the American populace. German-Americans, however, are roughly a sixth of the entire US populace. It is almost impossible to persecute 16 or 17 percent of a nation's population.

cwf1701 · Feb 3, 2004

tom said:
I have heard that the reason the WTC collapsed was some peculiarity of the construction. Would the ESB actually fall?

the WTC had a Truss-type construction for each of the 110 stories. plus the planes that hit the WTC was loaded with Fuel. if you had one plane hit the Empire state Bldg, you would have to turn it into a literal flying bomb pack with the equilvent of 2 B-17 bomb load. and the bombs would have to be equal to the largest allied bomb of WW2. OTOH, any bomber launched from Germany would have used up to 1/2 of it fuel just reaching NYC, whereas the planes that hit the WTC had 95% of its fuel onboard.

NapoleonXIV · Feb 3, 2004

Walter_Kaufmann said:
I doubt it. It was relatively easy to persecute a small group, such as the Japanese-Americans, who are roughly a third of one percent of the American populace. German-Americans, however, are roughly a sixth of the entire US populace. It is almost impossible to persecute 16 or 17 percent of a nation's population.

The black population of the US will be rather surprised to hear this.

However, I don't really think the nation would be all that effected one way or another by any bombings. All cities of the continental US had expected sabotage attacks and many were familiar with being able to see burning tankers from sub attacks offshore. Stories of the London blitz were part of our daily news. Any attacks on our cities would be highly resented, but probably seen as just some more casualties. If the spectre of the Holocaust did not make us want to punish and persecute the German people after the war, nothing ever would.

Michael E Johnson · Feb 3, 2004

--The black population of the US will be rather surprised to hear this.---

No shit-lol

Beck Reilly · Feb 3, 2004

NapoleonXIV said:
The black population of the US will be rather surprised to hear this.

The black population was kept down because the whites had advantages in everything (numbers, technology, organization, etc.) and they really didn't have any options. Had they tried to "rebel" or anything, they would have been brutally crushed and conditions after would be worse.

German-Americans, OTOH, would have been the technological and organizational equal to anyone who tried to persecute them. In short, there would have been something the German-Americans could have done about it. Also, it would be much harder to persecute German-Americans simply because their looks do not stand out.

Michael E Johnson · Feb 3, 2004

--they would have been brutally crushed and conditions after would be worse---

It still would have been fun while it lasted. And very richly deserved .

---German-Americans, OTOH, would have been the technological and organizational equal to anyone who tried to persecute them. In short, there would have been something the German-Americans could have done about it. Also, it would be much harder to persecute German-Americans simply because their looks do not stand out.---

OTL there were some Germans and Italians who were interned in camps like the Japanese.This wasnt usually the case because- lets face it they were white.Also by in large they were loyal.As were most Japanese Americans-but the carnage of Pearl Harbor and the fact that they werent white allowed most Americans to set that loyalty aside. So the larger question here is if there was a sufficiently bloody or destructive event comitted against the US by Germany would German -Americans whiteness and loyalty be set aside as it was with the Japanese?

Beck Reilly · Feb 3, 2004

Michael E Johnson said:
It still would have been fun while it lasted. And very richly deserved

Hmm...I certainly wouldn't use the word "fun." Take for example, Nat Turner's revolt. Hmm, I guess if you consider killing 30 women, children, old men and women "fun," well, let me just say, you're seriously fucked up. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Not to mention the cost that that relatively small rebellion had on the blacks' lives themselves. Before the revolt, the blacks of Southampton County, Virginia, enjoyed relatively good living standards. They were allowed to attend church services. They were allowed to roam around the county on Sundays in order to visit family members and friends, etc. As a result of Nat Turner's revolt, southern legislatures imposed stricter control on slaves, and the movement to abolish slavery, which had previously enjoyed some support in the South, became a northern phenomenon.

Michael E Johnson said:
As were most Japanese Americans-but the carnage of Pearl Harbor and the fact that they werent white allowed most Americans to set that loyalty aside. So the larger question here is if there was a sufficiently bloody or destructive event comitted against the US by Germany would German -Americans whiteness and loyalty be set aside as it was with the Japanese?

Is everything a race issue? No. The Japanese were interred because of the brutality of their shameful sneak attack on Pearl Harbor (which didn't succeed, they couldn't even defeat us on a Sunday morning during church services; they, for lack of a better term "woke a sleeping giant" and didn't get our carriers). They were interred because, unlike Germans, they didn't assimilate well. Their cultures were different. Misunderstanding abounded. They were relatively recent immigrants (within the past 30 years). It was bad and shouldn't have happened, but it didn't happen simply because they weren't white.

Abdul Hadi Pasha · Feb 3, 2004

tom said:
I have heard that the reason the WTC collapsed was some peculiarity of the construction. Would the ESB actually fall?

No. It would certainly cause a lot of damage, but not cause the whole building to collapse. There is no comparison between the fuel load of a jetliner and a "puny" WWII bomber, and the construction of the ESB is totally different - stronger but less efficient.

NHBL · Feb 3, 2004

Empire State building hit

I seem to recall that a bomber did strike the Empire State Building, although I don't remember details. Note that the building is still there.

NapoleonXIV · Feb 3, 2004

A B25 lost in fog, hit the Empire State on July 28, 1945. It killed 11 people and the crew. It reopened in two days.
A B25 weighs 10 tons vs a 737 weighing 232. Even with a full bomb load, which it did not have, there would still be little real comparison.

Melvin Loh · Feb 4, 2004

Re the US persecution of German-descended America,s have youy guys forgotten about the vociferous anti-German 'Liberty' movement in WWI, after there was public knowledge of unrestricted German submarine warfare against US shipping in the Atlantic ? The renaming of cities with German names such as Berlin, New Hampshire, and Bismarck, North Dakota, widespread attacks on German-American individuals, esp conscientious objectors and draft protesters by other white Americans, even to the extent of renaming the hamburger the 'liberty sandwich' for the war's duration. And widespread fear of German sabotage, which did occur with the 1916 bombing of the Black Tom Island munitions works in New Jersey. Now if such persecutions of the German pop in America had occurred during 1916-18 due to news and actuality of German attacks against American lives and property, then what would've stopped such ill-feeling and persecution from occurring in the event of a Nazi attack on the ESB ?

Scott Rosenthal · Feb 4, 2004

The WTC collapsed largely because its supports burned through as a result of the very hot fires from the jet fuel. The upper stories lacked asbestos covering (though my understanding is that this wasn't an essential factor - still, got to admit that our environmental safety regs worked just fine...nobody died of asbestos exposure!), and hence the flames melted the supporting trusses on each floor. When those gave way, the upper floors acted like a giant hammer, smashing their way downwards, crushing everything in their path. If you have a strong stomach (I don't) go watch the footage of the collapse(s) again, you will see the upper levels give way and fall as an almost indepent piece of the rest of the building.

The ESB was built completely different, and it is unlikely that a few German planes (assuming that they can FIND NYC and the ESB, you know they weren't lit up during the war...) without most of their fuel, and with a limited bombload are doing to do much. The B-25 accident had almost no effect, and though that was a reasonably small plane, the impact was impressive...

Tom_B · Feb 4, 2004

Nonny said:
In 1944 a Junkers 390 flew to within 15 miles of New York.
If they had been available, how would the 6,000 mile range Messerschmit, Junkers and Focke Wulf "Amerika Bombers" have been deployed? From where would they have flown? Singly or in numbers? How much bomb load? What would have been the likely targets? How would the USA have responded defence-wise?
Although Kamikaze type suicide wasn't quite in the Nazi mentality, what would have been the effect of such a plane flying right into the Empire State Building? At the very least the diversion of 100s of 90mm AA guns for home defence, guns which in OTL played a major part in ground mode in stopping the Germans last throw in the Battle of the Bulge!

The fatuous obsession with the Battle of the Bulge (history's most hyped battle) continues. Late WWII POD's make only a slight difference.

Dunash · Feb 4, 2004

"Fatuous" is defined in the dictionary as "stupid, imbecilic, foolish, meaningless, inane, silly". What a disgrace to describe Wacht am Rhein in which 500,000 Germans, 600,000 Americans and 55,000 British fought;and in which there were 100,000 German casualties, 81,000 American (including 23,554 captured and 19,000 killed) and 1400 British casualties as "hyped"!

Anthony Appleyard · Feb 4, 2004

"Fatuous" is defined in the dictionary as ...

For the same reason I don't like people using "the battle of the bulge" as slang for trying to slim.

Michael E Johnson · Feb 4, 2004

--- Two wrongs don't make a right. ----

No but it makes it even.Besides who says that killing slaveowners and those profiting from slavery is wrong?

----Not to mention the cost that that relatively small rebellion had on the blacks' lives themselves. Before the revolt, the blacks of Southampton County, Virginia, enjoyed relatively good living standards. They were allowed to attend church services. They were allowed to roam around the county on Sundays in order to visit family members and friends, etc. As a result of Nat Turner's revolt, southern legislatures imposed stricter control on slaves, and the movement to abolish slavery, which had previously enjoyed some support in the South, became a northern phenomenon.----

So let me get this straight.Those foolish black slaves didnt know how good they had it laboring their whole lives without pay and being subject to punishment,rape or death at any time and then they went and made it worse for themselves by trying to get away from their benelovent white masters?Absolute bullshit and slavery apologism at its finest-at least you are consistent.

--Is everything a race issue?--

In the United States ? Usually,but thats because of white racism.In the past and right now.

--The Japanese were interred because of the brutality of their shameful sneak attack on Pearl Harbor (which didn't succeed, they couldn't even defeat us on a Sunday morning during church services; they, for lack of a better term "woke a sleeping giant" and didn't get our carriers).
---

Absolute bullshit.The Japanese -Americans who were interned in those camps had NOTHING to do with Pearl Harbor.They were loyal Americans who remained loyal despite their shoddy treatment. Also lets get real -when Japan attacked the majority of the sailors were in bed ,sleeping off a night of drinking and fucking,not on their kness praying to Jesus. That doesnt make what happened to them less tragic but trying to churchify it is pathetic.

---They were interred because, unlike Germans, they didn't assimilate well. Their cultures were different. Misunderstanding abounded. They were relatively recent immigrants (within the past 30 years). ----

And why didnt they assimilate well? Cultural differences were eventually overlooked with European immigrants because they had white hides. It absolutely ridiculous and downright insulting to suggest that non-white people had the same immigrant experience in America as whites did.I know it kind of sullies that shining view of America on the hill,but its reality so accept it-apologism also doesnt work here.

MerryPrankster · Feb 4, 2004

"Besides who says that killing slaveowners and those profiting from slavery is wrong?"

Michael, in the past you said that EVERY white American has benefited from slavery in some way.

Hmm...remember the TL (POD: compensated emancipation leaves slaves as indentured servants) that involved a race war in the US South killing millions and establishing an independent black nation in Mississippi/Alabama? I remember you said that the US got what it deserved with that one.