Boy, you guys with your "what-if's" about WWII are both moot and boring. You guys must like staring into a mirror and talking to youselves, trying to impress the wall. LOL!
@Frontjunker Well, germany could easly have handeld those countries at it's own, but it was he that decleard war against russia and the united states. If he finnished up the war against england and those other small little countires first before declaring war against the russians, we'd all be speaking german by now.
I think it would be sad that all people speak german. The different languages of europe are a holy treasure of our ancestors. But please take a look at russia. Do you think that russia was a peaceful country at this time of our declaration? What do you think about this war against russia if it was a PREVENTIVE war?
I dont want to start a big discussion, find the truth for yourselve.
Greeting from an old germany, which is still living in some of us germans.
@Frontjunker it's really hard to know anything for certain regarding diplomatics from WW2, since there was alot of propaganda from both sides.
And i didn't really make those remarks to insult, i belive you germans have just as much right to be proud of your history as any other country here on earth.
Just look at us scandinavians, vikings really where a brutal and terrible people, but we still speak of it as it was the best moment in scandinavian history.
@tomchch But Hitler was an Idiot and tought he could fight all the big guys at once :/ thanks to this fag i have to learn french, cuz they were among the winners of ww2 and germany is only half it's size
@Xerardo84V Bro, im german ;) He had the choice, he could've settled with Poland...attacking france wasnt necessary, it was done to get revenge for WW1. The main reason was his theory "Nation without living space" and thats why he wanted to expand eastwards cuz its was full of communists. He also declared war to the usa unreasonable, on top of that the usa were neutral to begin with...
This is, what german school books tell. 1. Poland suppressed the german population in the occupied regions after WW1 allready. Poland was also very aggressive towards germany and felt safe because of its allies. 2. France decleared war with germany, so the attack was no german aggression and in the end it was successful. 3. USA supported the western allies from the very beginning. It was clear that they joined the war sooner or later.
@Xerardo84V The US didn't send in material assistance to Allies until March 1941, which is over 1 year and 6 months after the war had started. One can say they were sympathetic to the Allies but then again, I don't see how sending supplies and equipment effectively makes one an active member in the war - from that logic, I might as well say that the British and French were active combatants of the US Civil War.
That's not quite true. There was the so called "Cash & Carry-Act", which supported the western allies very early. Furthermore the USA secretly prepared the coming war by buildung military infrastructure in Africa. Additionally the "Destroyers for Bases Agreement". As a result the help from the US was not immaterial and the american leadership also wanted the war. Although the population did not - at least at first. What other choice did germany have?
Hitler and germany tried to do a lot of diplomacy before and during the war with the western allies und also with Poland. To no avail. Try the book: "Der Krieg der viele Väter hatte" by Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof.
Imagina, país sem armas é que tem influência na ONU!! Note que os 5 membros permanentes no Conselho de Segurança da ONU tem armas nucleares e a Índia que as possui mesmo não sendo signatária do tratado de ñ proliferação de armas nucleares conseguiu o apoio dos EUA por causa de um babaca chamado Lula que disse que nem Obama nem ninguém tem mais moral do que ele, pois tem orgulho de proibir arma nuclear na Constituição !!! Lula BABACA o câncer vai silenciar essa voz de bruxo pra sempre !!!
e o exercito Brasileiro? obsoleto mesmo na 2 guerra pra variar e hoje, 25 de outubro de 2011 graças ao PT e presidente Lula e Dilma obsoletos, forçar armadas obsoletas para um país emergente que quer assento permanente na ONU !!! por isto que os EUA apóiam a Índia !!!
@1963Austria I'm sure either if these 3 would have or at least made it to the point where the outcome is unpredictable, IF they sunk to Germany's level and destroyed their own citizens liberties in exchange for ordinance and man power
The US maybe. The US infantry proved to be superior in nearly every fight they had with the Wehrmacht. Germany had more advanced technology, but the US army was extremely well trained, more natural resources, complete naval superiority (aircraft carriers vs battleships), And lastly, the US won the race for the atomic bomb (thanks to german jewish scientists). This was the Nazis most fatal mistake: Their antisemitism cost Germany a large amount of brainpower.
US? Red Army destroyed 80-90% of Wehrmacht. If US wouldve had to face whole German War machine alone, they'd swam back home. Germans lost the race for A-bomb because of Norwegian guerilla forces which sabotaged the heavy water which were ment to sent to Germany. US infantry never fought Whermacht in fair fight, always huge supermacy of practicly everything. In 1944, Germany was already destroyed. D-Day took place just to stop communism taking over whole Europe.
Actually the Germans gave up on A-bomb research (which was conducted in Austria). Given more time and resources, they would have eventually found it, but just compare the research the US and the Germans invested in the project.
Germany beaten by 1944? You seem to forget the Battle of the Bulge or the Gothic Line defense. Yes, Germany was weakened. But war is not a sport or a "fair fight". War is about winning. And to be honest, the Germans never really had a chance.
@Kuner1 Germany's A-bomb research ended soon after Norwegian guerilla forces destroyed the heavy water. It just wouldve taken too long to get new heavy water. Germany was beaten in 1944. War machines of Western Allies and USSR are from different worlds. USSR was pushing hard from the East from Jan. 1943...that means for 1,5 years! I wouldnt agree with no having a chance though... If Germans couldve get Stalingrand under control, essential oil supplies from Caucasus wouldve been gone. (cont)
@Kuner1 (cont) Dosent matter how many tanks, planes and artillery pieces USSR couldve had produces behind Urals, if they dont have oil to get them moving. Keypoints in D-Days success are practicly matters of luck. Hitler wasnt awaken so help wasnt sent, though it wouldve made a huge difference Whole D-day seemed to be a defeat for the Allies until one group of troops happened to find a shortcut to rear of German bunkers.
You make valid points. Yes, the US could have been defeated, if the Soviet Union had been conquered. But therin lies the strategic error of the German strategy. Their entire strategy was based on thing running "as planned". It was pure insanity to assume the Soviet Union could be simply overrun and taken. Breaking the Alliance with Stalin was a suicide move.
And even without the Eastern Front, the Americans would have still gotten the Atomic Bomb first.
@Kuner1 There never was any real alliance between Germany and USSR. Both nations have had been hostile relationships with each others for centuries. Both, USSR and Germany knew Molotov-Ribbentrop pact wouldnt last long, it was just about who manages to attack first. USSR was nearly overrun, and Hitler actually believed Japanese would declare war on USSR same way Germany declared war on US. Agreed that US wouldve got Atomic Bomb before Germans (cont)
@Kuner1 (cont) but it wouldnt really have made any difference. Without Eastern Front Germany wouldve stayed as a superpower, and unlike Japan, it wouldnt allowed enemy planes just bomb cities. Theres absolutely no way US couldve dropped Atomic Bomb to Germany, because it wouldve had to be dropped from a bomber. Germans, on the other hand, already had V2 and they were building a ''New York-rocket''. We can just wonder where that wouldve been aimed at. (cont)
That's true, Germany would have had air superiority with the Messerschmidt.
Yes, on paper the German plan worked. But there were just too many eventualities in the plan for it to work in the real world.
In the end, it's a real shame, the Germans were once the greatest people on earth, they had everything going for them, but they wasted it all away in a blaze of hatred.
@Kuner1 True....Their technological advantage was some 10 years ahead of other world...Its just shame there had to be a psychopathic and antisemitic leader whose main goal wasn't to bring human species to the next level, but to destroy people just because of their believes and genetic ancestry.
It actually went beyond that. Since you're interested in the subject, I can recommend an interesting book for you: "Atlas Shrugged". It's a fictional novel, sort of in the way Nietzsche wrote fiction as a means to stage a philosophical discourse.
Atlas Shrugged dissects the mindset of the collectivist better than any other work ever written and analyses the fundamental motivation of people like Hitler, Stalin as well as every modern leftist and religious nutbag.
@Kuner1 Nope! Our plans were perfect but Hitler didnt trust our Generals and started to change plans himself without the military knowlegde the Generals had.
@Kuner1 (cont) So it really dosent matter if Germans wouldve got Atomic Bomb some 1-2 years later than US, because they wouldve had tools to deliver it to its target.
@MrBrandonXP True, economical output from the west helped USSR to go through the times when Germany would've crushed USSR if it would've been 1v1 situation.
@1963Austria Certainly England nor Russia couldn't have defeated Germany alone. The US would have found it impossible to land in Fortress Europe without their Bridgehead in England. But within a few years of the start of the war, American industrial output was vastly superior to Germany. A war of attrition would have suited America far more than it would Germany. Militarily the US overtook Germany by 1942. The difficulty however would always have been an invasion of Europe.
@1963Austria You are wrong. The contribution of England and the USA was insignificant. They started the Operation Overlord on 6 June 1944 when the German Armee already was almost complete defeated by the Red Army. P.S: Land-lease - 3% of all weapons used by Russians.
The russians must have felt good with the katushya ... you can trow more death and destruction over the horizon not only becouse you got more ! but also becouse you can afford it becouse your rockets and platforms are cheaper !
@0willsy01 yea the norwegian heavy water program. the German's were definitely well on there way to haveing a nuclear weapon, i just hadent ever herd of a actual V3 rocket,. sorry for the criticism
Germany needed an active 'heavy water' project to even think of developing nukes and they lost that in 1943 when British SOE-trained saboteurs destroyed a Norwegian 'heavy water' plant and sank a barge containing Germany's last reserves.
Germany never had nukes, a nuclear America was never a 'long term problem' (in fact the US and NATO held back a nuclear expansionist USSR for four decades!), and you're an utter ignoramus.
Right On! How in the hell otherwise thinking people do not see what kept the ballance of power together is beyond me! They beahave, as if they had no skin in the game while sitting on the same continental plane with the most aggersive, expansionist nation on the face of the planet: Soviet Russia!
@AdamSavage88 Einstein were german. He knowed that i would be very dangerous to give Hitler this dangerous technology. But if you ask me, Give them the USA were an terrible fault too. We all know what America did with this german Technology. But i think Hitler would have done much more terrible things with it.
@Warlord13413 The Germans were incapable of completing a nuke, they lacked to many special metals and Allied bombing made them move around, then move underground. The Germans had a good run at a nuke but there was to many shortages for them to continue.
@AdamSavage88 Sure the V3 were build. It were no Rocket. It were an Long Range Underground Artillery with a range of 150 km. It was able to bombard London easiely and defeat Great Britian and this way the Whole War at Western Front.
@1963Austria true!
Devdatt85D 16 hours ago
NÄBÄLWÄRFER
bienenpabst 2 weeks ago
Boy, you guys with your "what-if's" about WWII are both moot and boring. You guys must like staring into a mirror and talking to youselves, trying to impress the wall. LOL!
patrickwinslow 3 weeks ago
is there a part 5?
FearDivinity 2 months ago
dear Santa, i want for christmas ....
choastech7 3 months ago 15
He said rail guns...lol
Mandoon 3 months ago
heil hitler........!!!!!!!!!
iheartscience100 3 months ago
@iheartscience100 lame
BelgianBass 3 months ago
NO ONE, cant beat the power of the whermacht!!
VitalSoX 3 months ago
@VitalSoX sorry man, but it already happend.
tomchch 3 months ago
@tomchch
with the help of more than 60 states ... congratulate.
Frontjunker 3 months ago
@Frontjunker well maybe he shoudln't have waged war on over 60 states then.
tomchch 3 months ago
@tomchch
worldatwar. net/timeline/other/diplomacy39-45 . html
as you see, 80 % declares the war ON GERMANY - not the other way around.
Frontjunker 3 months ago
@Frontjunker Well, germany could easly have handeld those countries at it's own, but it was he that decleard war against russia and the united states. If he finnished up the war against england and those other small little countires first before declaring war against the russians, we'd all be speaking german by now.
tomchch 3 months ago
@tomchch
I think it would be sad that all people speak german. The different languages of europe are a holy treasure of our ancestors. But please take a look at russia. Do you think that russia was a peaceful country at this time of our declaration? What do you think about this war against russia if it was a PREVENTIVE war?
I dont want to start a big discussion, find the truth for yourselve.
Greeting from an old germany, which is still living in some of us germans.
Glory to all fatherlands..
Frontjunker 3 months ago
@Frontjunker it's really hard to know anything for certain regarding diplomatics from WW2, since there was alot of propaganda from both sides.
And i didn't really make those remarks to insult, i belive you germans have just as much right to be proud of your history as any other country here on earth.
Just look at us scandinavians, vikings really where a brutal and terrible people, but we still speak of it as it was the best moment in scandinavian history.
I'm glad you're proud, i love germany
tomchch 3 months ago
@tomchch But Hitler was an Idiot and tought he could fight all the big guys at once :/ thanks to this fag i have to learn french, cuz they were among the winners of ww2 and germany is only half it's size
Fosch64 3 months ago
@Fosch64
Learn the truth of history. He had no other choice.
Xerardo84V 3 months ago
@Xerardo84V Bro, im german ;) He had the choice, he could've settled with Poland...attacking france wasnt necessary, it was done to get revenge for WW1. The main reason was his theory "Nation without living space" and thats why he wanted to expand eastwards cuz its was full of communists. He also declared war to the usa unreasonable, on top of that the usa were neutral to begin with...
Fosch64 3 months ago
@Fosch64
This is, what german school books tell. 1. Poland suppressed the german population in the occupied regions after WW1 allready. Poland was also very aggressive towards germany and felt safe because of its allies. 2. France decleared war with germany, so the attack was no german aggression and in the end it was successful. 3. USA supported the western allies from the very beginning. It was clear that they joined the war sooner or later.
Xerardo84V 3 months ago
@Xerardo84V The US didn't send in material assistance to Allies until March 1941, which is over 1 year and 6 months after the war had started. One can say they were sympathetic to the Allies but then again, I don't see how sending supplies and equipment effectively makes one an active member in the war - from that logic, I might as well say that the British and French were active combatants of the US Civil War.
SuperBomber01 3 months ago
@SuperBomber01
That's not quite true. There was the so called "Cash & Carry-Act", which supported the western allies very early. Furthermore the USA secretly prepared the coming war by buildung military infrastructure in Africa. Additionally the "Destroyers for Bases Agreement". As a result the help from the US was not immaterial and the american leadership also wanted the war. Although the population did not - at least at first. What other choice did germany have?
Xerardo84V 2 months ago
@Fosch64
Hitler and germany tried to do a lot of diplomacy before and during the war with the western allies und also with Poland. To no avail. Try the book: "Der Krieg der viele Väter hatte" by Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof.
Xerardo84V 3 months ago
@VitalSoX Collect his ash and buy some super glue to put him together, if you feel like it :P
digimaks 3 months ago
Imagina, país sem armas é que tem influência na ONU!! Note que os 5 membros permanentes no Conselho de Segurança da ONU tem armas nucleares e a Índia que as possui mesmo não sendo signatária do tratado de ñ proliferação de armas nucleares conseguiu o apoio dos EUA por causa de um babaca chamado Lula que disse que nem Obama nem ninguém tem mais moral do que ele, pois tem orgulho de proibir arma nuclear na Constituição !!! Lula BABACA o câncer vai silenciar essa voz de bruxo pra sempre !!!
jonathanporto9 3 months ago
Hitler was a foggot who loved to suck on big guns..
knowpassword 3 months ago
@knowpassword Whats a Foggot?
narutofoxs 3 months ago
@narutofoxs bad spelling
knowpassword 3 months ago
They could have made 3 Tigers out of this!
VictumRoManius 4 months ago
a propósito, sou fã do General Eric Von Maistein
jonathanporto9 4 months ago
e o exercito Brasileiro? obsoleto mesmo na 2 guerra pra variar e hoje, 25 de outubro de 2011 graças ao PT e presidente Lula e Dilma obsoletos, forçar armadas obsoletas para um país emergente que quer assento permanente na ONU !!! por isto que os EUA apóiam a Índia !!!
jonathanporto9 4 months ago
@jonathanporto9 cara, força bélica não tem tanta influência na ONU não.
mengaocampeao2009 3 months ago
@mengaocampeao2009
imagina, país sem armas é que tem !!! kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
jonathanporto9 3 months ago
wir hätten mehr u-boote typ XXI gebraucht die technologie war schon 1939 verfügbar
ThePara09 4 months ago
@1963Austria yep :)
UND amerkia hat das KZ erst ermöglicht!!!
denn sie haben uns hilfsmittel geschickt!!
und amerika hat zugelassen das england menschen als schutzschilde benutzt hat (ww1) und und und ....
da sieht man was uns eingetrichtert wird jaja wir sind die bösen!
julian117891 4 months ago
In reality, neither the US, England or Russia could have defeated the Germans, alone......
1963Austria 4 months ago 60
@1963Austria I'm sure either if these 3 would have or at least made it to the point where the outcome is unpredictable, IF they sunk to Germany's level and destroyed their own citizens liberties in exchange for ordinance and man power
TrolliusTrollington 4 months ago
@1963Austria
The US maybe. The US infantry proved to be superior in nearly every fight they had with the Wehrmacht. Germany had more advanced technology, but the US army was extremely well trained, more natural resources, complete naval superiority (aircraft carriers vs battleships), And lastly, the US won the race for the atomic bomb (thanks to german jewish scientists). This was the Nazis most fatal mistake: Their antisemitism cost Germany a large amount of brainpower.
Kuner1 2 months ago
US? Red Army destroyed 80-90% of Wehrmacht. If US wouldve had to face whole German War machine alone, they'd swam back home. Germans lost the race for A-bomb because of Norwegian guerilla forces which sabotaged the heavy water which were ment to sent to Germany. US infantry never fought Whermacht in fair fight, always huge supermacy of practicly everything. In 1944, Germany was already destroyed. D-Day took place just to stop communism taking over whole Europe.
JohQx3 2 months ago
@JohQx3
Actually the Germans gave up on A-bomb research (which was conducted in Austria). Given more time and resources, they would have eventually found it, but just compare the research the US and the Germans invested in the project.
Germany beaten by 1944? You seem to forget the Battle of the Bulge or the Gothic Line defense. Yes, Germany was weakened. But war is not a sport or a "fair fight". War is about winning. And to be honest, the Germans never really had a chance.
Kuner1 2 months ago
@Kuner1 Germany's A-bomb research ended soon after Norwegian guerilla forces destroyed the heavy water. It just wouldve taken too long to get new heavy water. Germany was beaten in 1944. War machines of Western Allies and USSR are from different worlds. USSR was pushing hard from the East from Jan. 1943...that means for 1,5 years! I wouldnt agree with no having a chance though... If Germans couldve get Stalingrand under control, essential oil supplies from Caucasus wouldve been gone. (cont)
JohQx3 2 months ago
@Kuner1 (cont) Dosent matter how many tanks, planes and artillery pieces USSR couldve had produces behind Urals, if they dont have oil to get them moving. Keypoints in D-Days success are practicly matters of luck. Hitler wasnt awaken so help wasnt sent, though it wouldve made a huge difference Whole D-day seemed to be a defeat for the Allies until one group of troops happened to find a shortcut to rear of German bunkers.
JohQx3 2 months ago
@JohQx3
You make valid points. Yes, the US could have been defeated, if the Soviet Union had been conquered. But therin lies the strategic error of the German strategy. Their entire strategy was based on thing running "as planned". It was pure insanity to assume the Soviet Union could be simply overrun and taken. Breaking the Alliance with Stalin was a suicide move.
And even without the Eastern Front, the Americans would have still gotten the Atomic Bomb first.
Kuner1 2 months ago
@Kuner1 There never was any real alliance between Germany and USSR. Both nations have had been hostile relationships with each others for centuries. Both, USSR and Germany knew Molotov-Ribbentrop pact wouldnt last long, it was just about who manages to attack first. USSR was nearly overrun, and Hitler actually believed Japanese would declare war on USSR same way Germany declared war on US. Agreed that US wouldve got Atomic Bomb before Germans (cont)
JohQx3 2 months ago
@Kuner1 (cont) but it wouldnt really have made any difference. Without Eastern Front Germany wouldve stayed as a superpower, and unlike Japan, it wouldnt allowed enemy planes just bomb cities. Theres absolutely no way US couldve dropped Atomic Bomb to Germany, because it wouldve had to be dropped from a bomber. Germans, on the other hand, already had V2 and they were building a ''New York-rocket''. We can just wonder where that wouldve been aimed at. (cont)
JohQx3 2 months ago
@JohQx3
That's true, Germany would have had air superiority with the Messerschmidt.
Yes, on paper the German plan worked. But there were just too many eventualities in the plan for it to work in the real world.
In the end, it's a real shame, the Germans were once the greatest people on earth, they had everything going for them, but they wasted it all away in a blaze of hatred.
Kuner1 2 months ago
@Kuner1 True....Their technological advantage was some 10 years ahead of other world...Its just shame there had to be a psychopathic and antisemitic leader whose main goal wasn't to bring human species to the next level, but to destroy people just because of their believes and genetic ancestry.
JohQx3 2 months ago
@JohQx3
It actually went beyond that. Since you're interested in the subject, I can recommend an interesting book for you: "Atlas Shrugged". It's a fictional novel, sort of in the way Nietzsche wrote fiction as a means to stage a philosophical discourse.
Atlas Shrugged dissects the mindset of the collectivist better than any other work ever written and analyses the fundamental motivation of people like Hitler, Stalin as well as every modern leftist and religious nutbag.
Kuner1 2 months ago
@Kuner1 Yea, got to check it out. Thanks :)
JohQx3 2 months ago
@Kuner1 Nope! Our plans were perfect but Hitler didnt trust our Generals and started to change plans himself without the military knowlegde the Generals had.
KarasGameChannel 2 months ago
@Kuner1 (cont) So it really dosent matter if Germans wouldve got Atomic Bomb some 1-2 years later than US, because they wouldve had tools to deliver it to its target.
JohQx3 2 months ago
@JohQx3 No country could face Germany alone. Without 2 fronts, the Red Army would of been the Dead Army.
MrBrandonXP 2 weeks ago
@MrBrandonXP True, economical output from the west helped USSR to go through the times when Germany would've crushed USSR if it would've been 1v1 situation.
JohQx3 2 weeks ago
@1963Austria Certainly England nor Russia couldn't have defeated Germany alone. The US would have found it impossible to land in Fortress Europe without their Bridgehead in England. But within a few years of the start of the war, American industrial output was vastly superior to Germany. A war of attrition would have suited America far more than it would Germany. Militarily the US overtook Germany by 1942. The difficulty however would always have been an invasion of Europe.
mikser 2 months ago
@1963Austria You are wrong. The contribution of England and the USA was insignificant. They started the Operation Overlord on 6 June 1944 when the German Armee already was almost complete defeated by the Red Army. P.S: Land-lease - 3% of all weapons used by Russians.
Aeroschwein 2 months ago
@1963Austria No-one can defeat the Germans in anything because they are the über-mench!
JohanKH 2 months ago
@1963Austria Yeahh & they've had an impressive technology 2 !!!
MrPhantomFury 1 month ago
@1963Austria u are absolutely right.
MrRegisnex 1 month ago
@1963Austria We'll never know that for sure because Hilter in his infinite stupidity decided to take on the world.
TheNavyman53 2 weeks ago
@1963Austria but USA wont never give up until they victorious against the german she got a lot of man power(billion of US infantry)
30sectodeath 12 hours ago
Rocket artillery is just fucking awesome.... you just cant deny it...
Prometheus19853 5 months ago
nazi can win ww2
syirah951 6 months ago
The russians must have felt good with the katushya ... you can trow more death and destruction over the horizon not only becouse you got more ! but also becouse you can afford it becouse your rockets and platforms are cheaper !
artacania 7 months ago
@artacania KATUSHYA So effective that they buried alive germans and their allies in trenches.
MrBobe9 5 months ago
@MrBobe9
it was more quantity than quality that prevailed...
offlineri 4 months ago
Ahhh... saknar gamla Discovery channel! =(
prowler900 8 months ago
@0willsy01 yea the norwegian heavy water program. the German's were definitely well on there way to haveing a nuclear weapon, i just hadent ever herd of a actual V3 rocket,. sorry for the criticism
slim77k 9 months ago
@slim77k Wasn't V3 a huge cannon, that fired a rocket-projectile? It was destroyed before it had chance to take it's first shot at it's enemies.
OnlyLifeMatters 7 months ago
@0willsy01 a v-3, lmao yea okay then.
slim77k 10 months ago
@AdamSavage88 Proof, please. You brought it up, you provide the source. Unless it's just more bullshit.
ironhorzmn 11 months ago
@AdamSavage88 You're an idiot.
Germany needed an active 'heavy water' project to even think of developing nukes and they lost that in 1943 when British SOE-trained saboteurs destroyed a Norwegian 'heavy water' plant and sank a barge containing Germany's last reserves.
Germany never had nukes, a nuclear America was never a 'long term problem' (in fact the US and NATO held back a nuclear expansionist USSR for four decades!), and you're an utter ignoramus.
ironhorzmn 11 months ago
@ironhorzmn
Right On! How in the hell otherwise thinking people do not see what kept the ballance of power together is beyond me! They beahave, as if they had no skin in the game while sitting on the same continental plane with the most aggersive, expansionist nation on the face of the planet: Soviet Russia!
hetmanbasza 10 months ago
@AdamSavage88 Einstein were german. He knowed that i would be very dangerous to give Hitler this dangerous technology. But if you ask me, Give them the USA were an terrible fault too. We all know what America did with this german Technology. But i think Hitler would have done much more terrible things with it.
Warlord13413 1 year ago
@AdamSavage88 The Germans made nukes dude...
Warlord13413 1 year ago
@Warlord13413 The Germans were incapable of completing a nuke, they lacked to many special metals and Allied bombing made them move around, then move underground. The Germans had a good run at a nuke but there was to many shortages for them to continue.
Toddinfantry 1 year ago 2
@AdamSavage88 Sure the V3 were build. It were no Rocket. It were an Long Range Underground Artillery with a range of 150 km. It was able to bombard London easiely and defeat Great Britian and this way the Whole War at Western Front.
Warlord13413 1 year ago
@AdamSavage88 nope, you mean the V3 ;)
Warlord13413 1 year ago
@AdamSavage88 nope, you mean the V3 ;)
Warlord13413 1 year ago
they forgot the biggest gun ever used in combat (800mm rifled rail gun)
cammanderWho 1 year ago
V2 Rocket and Landkreuzer FTW !!!
iTzzEuphoriaaaaaa 1 year ago
@iTzzEuphoriaaaaaa p1000 and the p1500 landkreuzer was never made...
Maus and Die Glocke.. i say no more.
DontScatter 1 year ago
smart land weapon,today it has changed land warfare
mikerama1 2 years ago