Kingtiger
0:36
Added: 5 years ago
From: tbbmx200
Views: 717,039
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (2,304)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • German Steel

  • drive this tank to go to school.

    run over principal's car

  • cooooooool

  • Der Königstiger der König unter der Panzern dieser der Zeit.

  • does it have an original engine?

  • schade das die einen zu kleinen motor in den koenigstiger gebaut haben sonst waere er viel schneller und somit noch gefaehrlicher aber es war halt keine zeit viele tests zu machen man hat sie an der front gebraucht

  • Hey, give me my ride back!

  • Germans seemed to be overcompensating with this one.

  • German Steel!

  • @Juihi2 - German steel LOST the war. Look it up. 

  • Hehe nette kleine Maschine der Maybach 700 PS :)

  • ACHTUNG TIGER!!!

  • fantastico!

  • i wonder how enemies have been shitting bricks when that kind of thing is coming towards O_O

  • Pedazo de bicho para la epoca...me encanta

  • shermans would Gangbang that pile of german steel!

  • @blastermachine1 and still lose haha

    

  • @blastermachine1 That tank vs a group of shermans would be like shooting fish in a barrel. Sherman crews were glad that the Tigers were slow, because they can and did RUN! from the german tanks. The real victory came because the germans had a hard time getting those big tanks to the battle on time. The shermans would come in early, clean house, and then run before Daddy got on the scene.

  • @blah666ful

    Lmfao. Some people really have no clue.

  • @blah666ful aaaaaand because 80% of german army was in the easter front.

  • @blah666ful - That's not correct at all. The King Tiger was a mechanical piece of junk with transmission and steering gears breaking, along with very dangerous fuel leaks. They were so poorly designed that most of them never even saw combat. Even Hitler himself was disappointed with this thing. Sherman tanks had no need to run when American and British fighter bombers ruled the skies over Europe and blew thousands of German tanks to pieces.

  • @JohnQuincyAdams1 They did run, and call in an airstrike. Tank vs tank was not an option unless numbers were drastically in the sherman's favor. 4 shermans to one tiger or run and call in an airstrike.

  • @blastermachine1 Sherman tanks sucked bro

  • @plasticbudgie - Sherman tanks won the war. They were designed as an infantry support tank and for their intended use they excelled. Inexpensive and easy to manufacture, thousands and thousands of them were manufactured.

  • @Echeque5 Unfortunatly they had a habit of bursting into flames and killing thier crews, hence the name "Tommy Cooker" given to it. And it wasn't the sheman that won the war. The war was one by superior planing and military stradegy. Hitler had a bad habit of having his best generals killed due to paranoia or if they spoke against him. In hindsight the "Twenty of out men to knock out a tiger" plan kinda sucked. In happenstance most shermans got taken out half a mile away by a tigers gun.

  • @DeathbyDusk - In the big picture, there weren't many Tiger tanks made and even fewer of the mechanical nightmare Tiger II that eve Hitler himself was disappointed with. The massive quantities of Sherman and T-34 tanks manufactured were indeed one of the major reasons Nazi Germany lost the war. When the Germans lost a tank on the battlefield, it took months to replace, whereas when a Sherman or T-34 was lost on the battlefield, there were replacements waiting in line.

  • @DeathbyDusk - Further, U.S. and British planes had virtual complete control of the skies over Europe, which meant German tanks were comparatively easy to destroy, which happened frequently. Nazi Germany never stood a snowball's chance in hell of winning that stupid, genocidal, evil war that killed over 50 million people in Europe.

  • @Echeque5 Actually most experts believe that it would have ended regaurdless of using the Shermans rushing stradegy in the war. While the equation 4 to 1 are brandied about alot, in most conflicts upwards of ten shermans were lost against german tigers and tiger 2's. The four to one ratio is factored form panther losses. In regaurds to that, most tank kills were from tank killer aircraft. I don't disagree the nazi party was evil either. Though, in the end, it was its allies that cost it the war.

  • @DeathbyDusk - I have studied history for over 40 years and WWII in particular. Nazi Germany never had the industrial capacity to sustain and win WWII. They were virtually always short of everything, particularly fuel, which brought their tanks, planes, etc., to a standstill. Initially their armies did well because they had prepared for war for many years and had a large military build up vs other European countries that didn't. But long term, there was no rational way they could win.

  • @Echeque5 Again, history has show they failed. History has also shown why. I'm am mearly pointing out that Shermans were an old and frightfully poor choice for tank crews in the second world war. Again, Italy was more a hindrence to Germany then a help, starting the african campeign and regularily starting conflicts it could not finish. Also why are we having an intilectual discussion on youtube?

  • @DeathbyDusk - The Sherman tank was not a poor choice. It was the *only choice* and anything is better than *nothing*. However, the Sherman was designed and intended as in infantry support tank and at that it excelled. It was never designed to take on heavy tanks and neither is any light or medium tank.

  • @DeathbyDusk thy call it zerging dude thats why thy won the war thy waited for the eastfront to wear out his army and invaded beaches of normandy and other landings .......zerg just poor em al in.and wait for those brownings to overheat or run out of ammo....and for those plains where there not german jetfighters in the making when the tommys landed

  • @blastermachine1 are you mad the tiger would fuck the sherman they are like toys for the german tanks 1 tiger can fight 5 shermans at once

  • @Starcruiser15 - Only when the King Tiger wasn't *broken down*, or had *run out of fuel*. 

  • gitler KAPUT

  • wow:O

  • Too bad it had a medium tank sized engine, or it could really go!

  • love the engine sound

  • @0z3r0 - During WWII, that engine sound wasn't heard very often, as most King Tiger tanks broke down. Junk.

  • @Echeque5 Do your research. All were pretty much destroyed in combat, as opposed to breaking down. Thier engines were underpowered, but did not break down as much as everyone seems to think. Its main flaw was it its expense. 12 Tiger 2's backed up by 24 Tigers didn't really do much against 400 shermans. Not really a joke there, thats basically the summery of the largest concentration of tiger 2's in the war.

  • @DeathbyDusk - I am a historian of over 40 + years with thousands of history books in my personal library. Research? Come on over to my place sometime and you do all the research you want. The Tiger II was a mechanical piece of junk and most of them never saw combat because they broke down so frequently. They were underpowered and and overweight, putting massive stress on their driveline components with subsequent breakdowns.

  • this is one of three tanks from WWII that is best ever at least for me, together with tiger I and panther , King tiger if survived would be even today a menance ocourse with some heavy upgrades,

  • It had a number of names depending on who you talk to. Tiger B; Tiger II; King Tiger; Royal Tiger. I am sure if you were sat in a Sherman with one trundling towards you you would have called it many things :-)

  • RUN AWAY!

  • fdsgw

  • ну что подлецы, восхищаетесь достижениями нациков?, ну, ну... наш ракетоносец Ту-160 ждёт когда вы его разбудите. С ненавистью из РОССИИ!, и кстати, блексопс - ты придурок, Королевский тигр и есть Тигр II

  • Its a development of the tiger. It has thick sloped armour with more coverage and greater capacity. None of these tanks wer destroyed during ww2

  • Its a develop ent

  • it is a king tiger not a tiger 2

  • @blackops1348 same thing...

  • @blackops1348 kingtiger = tiger 2 !!!

    its called panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger II

  • @HeiniVoelker18 I know i like calling it a king tiger then a tiger II

  • @HeiniVoelker18 actually its Panzerkampfwagen Tiger Ausf. B

  • nice tiger ii

  • @0willsy01 In 1974, the German Red Cross reported that about 41,000 German MIAs were last reported in western Germany, which is also the location of the prisoner camps.[98] It is reasonable to assume that some deaths in transit camps just before the end of the war went unreported in the chaos at the time Historian Albert Cowdrey estimates that the total figure is unlikely to be above the aggregate of the recorded deaths and the MIAs, which together total 56,285.

  • @0willsy01 No mate, there are so called " alien autopies", truthers, and all kinds of literature and dicumentaries to fool the honest but naive. Former OberLt Orndorrff who lives2 hosuese form me and is an active 89 years old is an eyewitness who actually fougt at the Kursk salient and Western Front. He later described is command of volkstrum and HitlerYouth. He and many others whose homes were in the eastern part of Germany were decalred as statless and never repatriated.

  • It's NOT KING Tiger - it's Bengal Tiger...

  • @akkudakkupl The phrase Bengal Tiger translates into German as KonigsTiger, also known as King Tiger by the Americans, Royal Tiger to the brits or PanzerKampfwagen VI to others.

  • @fallschirmjager0000 I know what it means. What I state is that it is known not under its real name, because of crude translation (and lack of linguistic skill of the soldiers).

  • @0willsy01 You need to research more fully. His addmission was that he miscalculated the amount of food needed. You are reading into a massive lie propagated by white supremacist conspricacy theorist. You are becoming no better than the religous zealots you say you despise. You should know that most of youtube and wiki is a crock. My neighbour is an expatriate who was there he one of the "missing" people declared stateless

  • @0willsy0 Stephen E. Ambrose later wrote in the New York Times:

    Mr. Bacque is wrong on every major charge. German prisoners did not die by the hundreds of thousands,There was nothing sinister or secret about the "disarmed enemy forces" designation or about the column "other losses." Mr. Bacque's "missing million" were old men and young boys in the Volkssturm (People's Militia) released without formal discharge and transfers

  • @0willsy01 He did not. Id you read the letter to Mamie Eisenhower in its entirity he amkes it clear he is referening to the nazis not ethnic Germans ( which he himself was) All the conspiracy theoeies and websites you follow religously ( hypocrtical for an atheist to have such blind faitth isn't it?) are base of white supremicist and nazi apologist James Bacque. Bacque falied to tabulate the released, repartiated POWs and simply called them "missing".

  • O willyI suggest you read Von Braun's autobiograly as well as Niel Furguson Work, along with Abrose

  • @0willsy01 The Esenhower Death Camps area myth propagated by Neo nazis, which is why I dump yu in that catergory for adhereingto it. The scientist in " paper clip" like Vo Braunwere not throroughly party indoctrinated in nazism. Von Braun himself ahd been arrested at least on two ocassions. Is work in the US Space Programme only vindicated and furthered the work of Goddard.

  • @0willsy01 First grow up and accept these points:1) the nazi lost the war,2) much of their later equpmet was cobbled together and rushed into service ( like the KT) because they faced imminent defeat 3) The Western Allies did not slaughter nazi POWs 4) The "world" did not gang up on the nazis 5) No one "stole" all of nazi tech.

    You accuse and debase people of regligous faith and you worhsip and revel in the myth of nazi tech.

  • @0willsy01 Grown men don't drop hints State your postion with facts, documentation, and reasoning

  • @0willsy01 Like I give a fuck what you and your fag friends think. You are the laugh., you nazi teabagger. I See how easy it is to goad a not nits spinless bastard like you. Go ahead and cry dickless your fag mates will wipe your arse after you blow them off. Dfend your weak postion like a man and admit how stupid, ans misguided it is

  • @0willsy01 Yes you must rest because you are a eunuch, and you're laughing at yourself

  • @0willsy01 Your're a dickless cur? Like that spelling? It means you area mongrel dog with no sex organ. That make sense to you?

  • @0willsy01 And you're wanking again,lmao. Tell us o wise willywanker show us what wasso "dekades" advanced about this shit pile? the underpowered engine that burned up pushing its bulk?yjr avanced transmisson that got ground up?the intreleaved tracks that caked with mud? the manhous and material that went into. Waiting for your pro nazi reply.

  • @MrFKMusic But it never destroyed one

  • @0willsy01 But take a closer look at this thing

    It was so like the most german Weapons a few dekades before its Time - all these things where th complexe th build, toexpensive , but fucking good

  • @daddymhm O willy the willy wanker. We=hen will you stop you reach arounds? Simpicity of design, cost, and operation,-- not complexity, is good. When will you nazi apologsit ever learn?

  • @MatrixtheHedgehog Auf Google wird ja angeblich nicht Zensiert ! HA, HA.

    Wenn das Deutsche Militär im 2. Weltkrieg nur 50 % von den Nachschubgütern gehabt hätte die die Alliierten hatten, so wären auch Heute noch Alliierte Soldaten im Kampf um den letzten Zipfel von Alaska auf verlorenem Posten.

  • @daddymhm Well actually Google should censor that stupid lie. The stupiod nazi couldn't spellsupply, let alone AK.

  • now that´s what the german army needed to win WW2 ;D (joke)

  • It's good to be the King.

  • Russian Happymeal.....

  • ohh wait.....did you stole my car?

  • OMG i never imagined this thing to be that huge O_o

  • @MrFKMusic never destoyed a Pershing. In theonly encounter it GOT destoyed bya Pershing

  • @USExceptionalism A pershing is a toy against an Tiger2 .When we only had the Supply and the numbers of Produktion that the u.s. has

    Today Youre White House will be an german Tank garage

  • Mind your toes!

  • I LOVE THE TIGER TANKS

  • wwwwwaaaaaaaa run away that thing is just soooooo scary :o

  • German steel!

  • @Timx4 And it Rolls ,and it makes the allied Infantry pissing in theyreFategues

  • @Timx4 No actually at that point it was Swedish

  • @USExceptionalism What i meant about "'german steel'' has nothing to do whether or not it was made in Germany or sweeden. it was meant something else, go search on google.

  • @Timx4 Prost !

  • KING TIGER with the Porsche turret is the most beautiful, and rare! They have one at the Bovington tank museum.

  • Super

  • so einen will ich auch

  • the most powerful tank in world war 2

  • does this still have the Porche Turret or did they already change that in this model

  • Dont feed the troll (nissan80) ffs! Clearly he is just trying to provoke an argument, or he's just severely retarded...

  • this is a tank.. this is german steel haha

  • dude that's a panther not a king tiger... king tiger didn't saw action... it was only a concept... by the time they could build a king tiger the war was over...

  • @nissan80

    No you're wrong that IS a King Tiger and they saw combat in the Second World War from mid-1944 onwards.

  • @nissan80 nope

  • I thought it wa real, then I saw the French flag at the end.

  • they made this 70years ago.・・・・・incredible!

    This is a rival of the Japanese tank type 89.huhuhu・・・

  • That is just beautiful machine. Love it.

  • p1000 is better

    p1500 is too beter

  • @l4hv1n3k the king tiger was the best tank in the war

  • @l4hv1n3k Lol a tiger 2 sits 5 feet from the P1000, P1000 cant shoot Tiger II at all, Tiger 2 shots it like a million times, TIGER 2 WINZ YO

  • @Shuttheheckup735 no he kill him with his cannon

  • @l4hv1n3k The lowest cannon on the P-1000 is 20 feet up and not able to aim low enough to hit anything within 100 feet away, so a Tiger II 5 feet away, is invincible, unless the P-1000 driver is amazing and drives over the king tiger like a monster truck.

  • is chuck norris bike

  • @therockchannel100 Chuck norris shoes

  • imagine being a Russian soldier and this beast comes at you. no thanks

  • @frogjezz And yet the Russians had them on the run with t-34/85s

  • @IrishHitman79 whilst i agree with you on that, most king tigers were only put out of action due to mechanical failure/lack of spare parts and fuel shortages. even then the biggest problem the germans faced was massive numerical inferiority, if you look at some of the stats, tank kill ratio was usually around 3:1 in favour of the germans, but the russians were producing about 8 times the number of tanks that germany was, after the failure of Barbarossa, germany was going to lose no matter what

  • @Nathan5027 I agree to i was just saying in, Look at what Kurt Kinspel did in his Tiger1/2 tanks. If Germany had spent more time im making assault guns and Panzer 4s they would probably held out longer. I have one question did the Germans ever start to use Diesel engines in there tanks like the Russians?

  • @IrishHitman79 In retrospect, Germany could have increased their success chances by alot of smaller or larger adjustments, however, in the end it came down to simple numbers. Even IF Germany had beaten Britain in 40/41, in the end, the concerted efforts by russia and the US would have ultimately overpowered the German production. 10000 Shermans and 10000 T34 ... it was too much.

  • @randomUnhold in hind sight, the war, at the beginning at least, was a very close run thing, first Britain and France fluffed, by nit invading Germany, then germany fluffs the battle of britain by switching to civilian targets and not keeping the pressure on airfields, followed by an immidiate invasion. then the fluff barbarossa by failing to consider cold weather preparation, or getting the japanese to attack the east of russia and tying up any reserve forces.

  • @IrishHitman79 not sure, i know they planned to use diesel to power the generator in the maus, other than that i don't know. it's probable that if the war went on longer, they would have developed one, but as is, don't think so.

    all that said, the early german tank designs were painfully flawed; thin, flat armour, light weaponry etc. that they found a 'gem' in the stug is incredible, but surely they could have used that as a basis to design a decent purpose built TD before the hetzer in 1944

  • Comment removed

  • I love that tank its my favorite i preger WWII tanks than the ones that are build now

  • Seventy metric tons O_O with 190 mm of armor it truely is the king.

    The only other tank from 1944 with more amror then this is the Jagdtiger!

  • @DeltarPrime The Jagdtiger was not a tank. The King Tiger is the heaviest tank ever to see the battlefield from the beginning of time through today.

  • NICE

  • 1940's tank

  • geil, wo war das denn ?

  • @melltor

    In Frankreich. Zumindest sieht man bei 0:28 eine französische Fahne im Hintergrund.

  • @LotrFC

    tatsache, danke :)

    gut aufgepasst inspector columbo ;)

  • Dear God.....

  • @0willsy01

    In order to bypas and cut off the city as you suggested, the germans would of had to cross the Don to the N , and push NE, in the SE advance to and along the whole Volga to the Caspian Sea, cross the Volga on a broad front from at least Stalingrad to the Caspian Sea and establish secure bridgeheads along the whole river etc etc . An impossible task that wasnt even disscused.

    Its better if you looked at a map , or an operational map to better understand the situation.

    Cheers !

  • @0willsy01

    No mate , Stalingrad couldnt be completelly encircled and cut off. Stalingrad is on the Volga, "with the back" to the Volga so to speak . Case Blue started and the germans advanced twards the SE along the Don river , which "guarded" the left flank of the advance. Near Stalingrad the Don turns S , and makes a bend , which the germans crossed , but they didnt cross the Don to the N , where the Vatutin and Danilov`s forces were stationed.

  • @0willsy01

    But fact of the matter is , many of the german generals in the general staff were simply spinless carrierists , and many of them were involved in the decision makeing processes of the war . Generals like Alfred Jodl , Wilhelm Keitel , Walter von Brauchitsch or Goering etc etc , were not military geniuses .

    Fact is all higher echelons of the armed forces were plagued with bureaucracy , and they dictated the course of the war , and large scale decisions , with Hitler`s overview ofc.

  • @0willsy01

    Mate , Stalingrad couldnt be surrounded and cut off...as about 10% of the city was located on the far side of the Volga . Actually Stalingrad was bombed into rubble , and that actually helped the defending russians. The 6th army controled more than 90% of the city , but reinforcments and suplies were still comeing in over the Volga.

    I know that when people think about german generals they imediatelly think about Guderian , Rommel , Manstein etc etc ... military geniuses.

  • @0willsy01

    And also its becomeing more more apearent that actually Hitler wasnt to blame for many of the dissasters that have been imputed to him . in the early years of the at least he actually gave quite a lot of control , specially to the OKH , in the planing of the operations . As the war dragged on , he increassinglly became involved in the decision makeing procces , true . But i think the fault is shared by both Hitler and the general staff in equall meassure.

  • @0willsy01

    No mate , actually there was no way the germans could take the Baku Oil Fields without takeing Stalingrad. Stalingrad had to be taken , couse it commanded the major suply routes on the Volga to the soviet forces defending in the S. And also advanceing to the oil fields without takeing Stalingrad would be insane , as the left flank of the advance would be dangerouslly exposed .

    Problem is the germans split their forces and tryed to take them both at once , which is a big mistake .

  • @Cosmin1511 Hitler should have focused on Moscow, once you take Moscow you destroy Russian morale plus Stalin would have to flee his own capital. After Moscow was taken then Hitler should have focused on Stalingrad/Baku oil fields. -Hitler wanted to take Stalingrad because of its name STALINgrad...

  • @SauronMouth

    On the 14th of September 1812 Napoleon captured Moskow and burnt it to the ground, but failed to distroy the Russian army . Its widelly known what happened in the end.

    In order to secure the Baku Oilfields , Stalingrad had to be taken ... and not just couse of its name ...but couse it was a very important strategic point. It commanded most of the comunication lines to the armies in the S defending the OilFields , to name just one of point of its importance .

  • Dear santa...

  • @URO006 So little but so much! lol

  • @UkiKuki877 No! no! So much but so much more! :)

  • Only wish a united Germany would assert themselves again!

  • You do not win wars by capturing ground. You have to destroy your enemy (whoever that is).

  • King Tiger,the destroyer of asphalt

  • geil panzer rollen durch die straßen ist ja ganz wie in China

  • Listen to it purrrr!

  • President Adams thank yu for your real insights

  • Kierowca musi się nauczyć jeździć tym kolosem, taka jazda jak widać na filmie natychmiast doprowadziła by załogę do wymiotów(choroba morska).

  • @JohnQuincyAdams1 I know, it had it's problems, but I still wouldn't want to face off with one.... Also, I think the war would have lasted longer if they massed produced Panzer IV's instead of trying to go bigger & if Hitler would have let his commanders make the calls and not him.

  • @TheAnimal590-Field Marshall Erwin Rommel could have been in complete charge of Nazi Germany's military forces and they still would have resoundingly lost. Rommel knew this, which is why he wanted to sue for peace and end the war, before all of Germany was destroyed, (as it sadly was). For tanks to be an effective weapon, control of the air must be maintained and after the Battle of Britain with the Luftwaffe being virtually destroyed, Nazi Germany lost air control for the rest of the war.

  • @SwineNahNah

    My arguement was that the Germans could have knocked the Soviets out in 1941 and effectively won, nation vs nation with what they had.

    Had the Nazis not been evil and taken advantage of various liberated people, two examples being Jews & Ukrainians, they would have had a larger manpower base.

    Puppet regimes can solve these problems to a large extent, the French people on a large part collaborated with the Nazis, establishment likes to hide this fact.

  • @otester - Nazi Germany never had the industrial capacity to sustain and win WWII. With the Soviet Union specifically, Nazi Germany's supply lines were stretched to the breaking point because of the very long distances on the Russian Front.

  • @JohnQuincyAdams1true they could not win a long war, but they could have won the war. they made mistakes and had a LOT of 'bad luck'. Everyone(including the allies) thought Russia would be conquered in about 2 months. the Russian army was weak. but they made several big mistakes, like spreading the forces to thin, wait to long so Russian reinforcements could arrive etc.

  • @otester

    If they were like "We liberated you wfrom evil Soviets, now come help us to defeat them completely, we ask only for cooperation", then yes, that would work. Istead they acted like idiots.

  • i love the nazist

  • @valerossishit - You love the, "nazist"? Amazing you'd publicly admit that and be embarrassed so much.

  • Ohhh, listen to that baby purr, just like a real tiger. lol :P Beautiful tank

  • @TheAnimal590 - It' s a good thing that a tanks beauty has nothing to do with its combat effectiveness. This thing was a mechanical nightmare and broke down frequently.

  • nice

    a köti

    (Tiger 2 German name is Königs tiger(köti))

  • now that is a tank , not this fancy things like m1a1 or leopard 2

  • @vladimirmilojevic1 - It was a tank? Are you sure? It did keep many mechanics busy trying to fix the stupid thing with all the breakdowns it suffered.

  • Los Kameraden, Beschuss verlagern! Amiiiiis!

  • good job for the allies these things had such a short range

  • It bounces off!

    We didint penetrate their armor!

    We are hit!

    Fire, pull it out!

    Bailt out!

  • @xX0rt4Xx Said the nazi scum

  • The hell are you talking about? Gosh what an extremist, i hate that kind of people. My quotes was taken by the game "World of Tanks". Damn.. search first, then criticize.

  • kiss me, tiger!

  • @grenzdebiler1 - That's not a Tiger tank. It's the unreliable, mechanical nightmare known as the King Tiger, or Tiger II.

  • im pretty sure they have the korean and vietnam wars listed in american books and they are referred to as wars or conflicts. How bout you actually pick up a book smtime ingus

  • germany should have built more assaults guns like StuGs and hetzers. they were very reliable vehicles that always worked without breaking down, cheap to build, easy to maintain and very effective. they could also easily be hidden because they were relatively small.

  • @RexMineCraft - Nazi Germany didn't have the industrial capacity to build more of *anything*. They were stretched to the limit and even *that* wasn't enough to sustain and win WWII, thank God.

  • @JohnQuincyAdams1

    by more i meant not wasting resources on vehicles like the tiger ii but use those resources to build more stugs etc

  • @RexMineCraft - It wold have only delayed the inevitable anyway, as Nazi Germany never had the industrial capacity to sustain and win WWII, thank God.