0
Jhon and susan traveled with their mom from the eartern part of Virginia to Florida how many states did they probably go through to get there?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
4 counting Virginia
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Where do bacrtian camels live?
central and eartern Asian deserts
Which middle eartern influenced the course of world history?
Jesus!
What is the New South Wales climate?
New South Wales has a variety of climates, with temperatures ranging from well below freezing to 45 degrees Celsius in some places. NSW has a wet temperate climate north of about Newcastle on the eartern side of the great dividing range, with a summer rainfal maximum north of a line roughly through Sydney/Broken Hill, and a winter rainfall maximum to the south of that line (so, approaching a Mediterranean climate). There is little true desert in NSW (mostly in the NW corner) with much of its area west of the ranges classed as "semi-arid". Cobar, some 750km west of Sydney has 400mm of rain annually, which is well outside true "desert" criteria. Climates are modified by the ranges with the southern part of the Great Dividing Range having bitterly cold winters.Depends where in NSW- I live on the coast of NSW. The coast has very warm summers and cold winters (once every few years there might be a hailstorm).
Why is the battle of Britain referred to as a turning point of World War II?
Yes.MLMAnswerNO many times no.The German Casualties in the Battle of Britain where heavy but not soo important for a defeat, the turning point was the Battle of Stalingrad and the Battle of Kursk in Europe.Nearly 1880 German planes where shot down and some 1550 british planes where destroyed.1.8 k planes detroyed means a lot now, but comparing them with the casualties sustained in the Eartern front that is a small casualty. Answerthe battle of Britain was a turning point in the war. if Britain would have lost, she would have certainly been invaded and out of the war. so there would have been no western front at all. Answeryes it was, a very big one aswell, because if the british hadnt have won they wouldn't have been able to send soldiers out to the other battles such as "the battle of Stalingrad" or "the battle of the kursk". Have some of you people even read any WWII history or know what the Battle of Britain was? Britain did not fight at Stalingrad or the Kursk. The German casualties were limited to the crews of those 1880 planes. That's not "heavy casualties".YESBritain didn't really 'win' the Battle of Britain as no one surrendered and no army was defeated. It was more that Hitler realized he could not win and turned his attention elsewhere. That allowed Britain to become a huge unsinkable aircraft carrier from which the RAF and US 8th Army Air Corps could strike Germany's homeland. In addition, without the British Isles to use as a staging point there could not have been a D-Day invasion and it would have been almost impossible to open a western front. The answer to this question is NO. Britain did 'win' the Battle Of Britain in as much as The Luftwaffe was unable to gain air supremacy over the southern counties of England and thus could not fulfil the first requirement for a successful invasion.BUTIf Germany had won the Battle and wounded the RAF sufficiently to prevent it's efective intervention against a seabourne attack it would have made no difference to the eventual outcome of any invasion. The key to Britain's defence in 1940 was still, as it had been for hundreds of years, the Royal Navy. Germany had no answer to what was at the time one of the largest and most powerful fleets in the world. Indeed, the German navy thought the idea of an invasion of England in 1940 to be suicidal regardless of the fate of the RAF. There is no doubt there would have been grievous losses in ships and men to the Royal Navy from air attacks and the many minefields the Germans would have laid to protect their invasion fleet but the result is not in doubt, the invasion barges would have been sunk and the vital resupply of the German army (which probably would have gained a bridgehead) would have been prevented. An army without supply is worse than useless and would have had to attempt evacuation. In the face of any surviving RN warships in the channel and British land force counter attacks, any evacuation would have resulted in disaster for the Germans.All this was known to the Germans at the time and there is some evidence that an invasion of Britain was never really seriously contemplated by Hitler, rather he was using the threat of invasion to convince the British to sue for a peaceful settlement.So, the Battle of Britain was a defeat for the Luftwaffe but didn't affect the eventual outcome of World War 2. The turning point was the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in 1941 and the consequent German declaration of war on The United States. The enormous losses in men and material the Germans suffered on the eastern front seem decisive but ultimately the development of the nuclear bomb by the western allies would have rendered them irrelevant. Had the Germans not invaded Russia they would still have been defeated even if they had managed to conquer the United Kingdom.
