yes, I guess the guys in the panzer grenadier (with the rim coming down over the ears) helmets are heer, its a bit of a medley and I suspect its not a real series of events. After the attack has started there are shots of very casual looking troops wandering along and the Shermans would have become more cautious than to keep racing along a road, would probably have pulled back and wated for infantry support. Real footage just edited to create the narrative for a news/propanga film.
German soldiers were highly trained in ww2 with a raw recruit normally having 6 months training minimum (not during late in the war when Germany started losing) and 1 German private can probably take down 3 American corporals with a Luger before getting shot all these movies and games are boring because 1 private takes on a army with only 2 weeks of training btw the soviets, uk and usa and the other nations ( rest of the allies) depended on numbers not skill
your a fool, most of germanys troops didnt even wana fight, and wer inferior to western allied troops in almost every way, the germans had some elite volenteer fighting squads, but those wer a small % of the entire german army and wer mostly wasted in the early stages of the war on the eastern front... when the english invaded france, all germany had left was little kids and old men with shitty training, as for numbers not skill, that was just russia, canadian soldiers trained for years
BLAH,BLAH,BLAH,people keep on talikng about the German Army as if they are experts most Germans fought for their Country and not for Hitler a big difference from the Wehrmact and the Waffen SS name me one person who would not answer the call to arms ? unless they were traitors.......
And what did Germany represent in 1939? Stripping citizenship from German WWI veterans because they were Jewish. The racism of the Nuremburg laws. Revoking the rights of every Germans guaranteed by their constitution through emergency decree. The imprisoning of people who had different political views.
Oh yeah Nazi Germany was something to be proud to fight for. No I am sorry, no respect for fighting for that, especially when many Germans didn't and died for that choice.
Again they knew of the racial Nuremberg laws, kristallnacht, the loss of their own civil rights by Nazi emergency decree, and that their country waged a war of aggression against neutral states like Denmark and Belgium all prior to Barbarossa. They knew their government had spies among them to look for dissent (gestapo), they knew there were camps were political enemies were held.
Many Germans chose not to fight for that, and were put in camps (ie Konrad Adenauer), they are owed respect.
@Mcplkelly The Germans also knew doctors were under orders to "put down" the retarded, the sick, the crippled. FDR would have been murdered, and Hitler, with his one testicle was offended that FDR the cripple, and Stalin with his useless arm were defeating him.
@Mcplkelly Different times, my friend. Germans were raIsed with a sense of duty, back then, to country. This was regardless of the government/regime in charge. Some, like Stauffenberg, came to their senses too late. So, they had to go to extreme measures to try and stop the war. Later in the war, it was either the will to survive or the brainwashed youth that kept the fighting going. The average German was fighting for country, despite laws against the Jews. Just the way it was.
Maybe but blind obedience to one's country is not a respectable trait, especially when so much of what was wrong with Nazi Germany was plain to see. The real German heroes are those who saw Nazi Germany for what it was and refused to accept it. Many languished in camps because of it, such as Konrad Adenauer, first chancellor of west Germany, or Sophie Scholl. Had more Germans been like them WWII and the holocaust never would have happened.
@Mcplkelly I cannot disagree with your statement, as is. However, we are looking at it from hindsight. We were not there. The majority supported Hitler. A soldier's duty is to his leader, of which those soldiers took an oath to follow. Like I stated earlier, too many of those soldiers came to their senses far too late to change the outcome of the war. As for "many" languishing in camps, there were not that many, as compared to the Jews/Gypsies/Slavs/Poles. Not nearly as many.
Not many mainly because few were willing to resist. I do agree with much of what you say, I personally can't even remember where this conversation started, but my original comments were probably directed at those who feel the German soldier of WWII deserves the same level of respect as allied soldiers, a sentiment I disagree with. While I can understand why the Germans fought, I can't respect them for the reasons I listed. I respect those who resisted hitler and fought against him, not for him.
@Mcplkelly I've been reading a book by Victor Klemperer (1881-1960), LTI - Lingua Tertii Imperii, or translated as"The Language of the Third Reich." It is very interesting about how the Nazis created the culture that would make their soldiers (and people) fight for Hitler. I would reccommend it to you, so you might better grasp my point of view about Germany of that time. No human being believes that they would do the same. I say some are doing the same, right now, all over the world.
Well, I mean, when the enemy inflicts so many casualties in your army,puts up a helluva fight though they are outnumbered,outgunned, have almost no air cover and their boss is the biggest loon of the century, you're not going to say that that army is crap,because the question arises: "So why the hell was it so hard for you to kick their ass?" The truth is,the only armies in WW2 that had real dedicated soldiers were the Germans and the Russians,for obvious reasons.
I disagree, the western citizen soldier was quite dedicated to winning the war. Theirs was not a racial war however, and they didnt waste their lives in hopeless situations like the Germans or Soviets may have.
Being drafted (or volunteering,for that matter) and ending up in a war IS a hopeless situation.Sure,there are circumstances and there are statistics,but in principle,it;s the same thing.And you're kidding about the racial or ideological issue;the Western powers had their propaganda too, c'mon....
What propaganda, its pretty well known the Nazi Government had a racial and ideological agenda, and that there were many Germans who bought in to it.
Really since the 80's there has been a real close examination of the role of the Wehrmacht as a willing participant in Nazi Genocidal policies. Most of the young conscripts in the Wehrmacht would have spent their teen years being taught in the Nazi School system which was highly ideological.
2. Oh, and the Japanese. Having said that, the Allies did make a mess out of things, when you put it in perspective...at the beginning of the war, they underestimated the enemy, then they had a very hard time organizing, and when it came to the actual fighting, well, you be the judge of that, with Patton and Montgomery racing each other and letting the Soviets occupy Eastern Europe....
What do you mean exactly? :-| Even in this war rather the men count! ;-) The U.S. could have: a lot of vehicles (tanks, aeroplanes, ships etc...), more men. But Germany has got more soldiers! Have you seen the movie 300? There is a conversation between King Leonidas and Xerxes, during the break of the Battle of Thermopylae. This quote is a case in point. "You have many slaves, Xerxes, but few warriors." ;-)
But the Fallschirm-Jäger-Regiment 6 was a famous unit too in the Battles of Normandy. Because of their actions at the Battle of Carentan (June 1014, 1944).
And these German soldiers were ready to fight. A battalion commander in the 29th remarked to an unbelieving counterpart from another regiment, "Those Germans are the best soldiers I ever saw. They're smart and they don't know what the word 'fear' means. They come in and they keep coming until they get their job done or you kill'em."
Rifle companies in the FJ had twenty MG 42s and 43 submachine guns; rifle companies in the 29th had two machine guns and nine BARs. At the squad level, the GIs had a single BAR; the German parachute squad had two MG 42s and three submachine guns. The Germans had three times as many mortars as the Americans, and heavier ones. So in any encounter between equal numbers of Americans and Fallschirmjäger, the Germans had from six to twenty times as much firepower.
The city was an important strategic objective, and was heavily damaged during the Battle of Normandy. The Fallschirmjäger were perhaps the best-armed infantrymen in the world in 1944. The 3rd FJ had 930 light machine guns, eleven times as many as its chief opponent, the U.S. 29th Division.
n June 1944 the 3. Fallschrim-Jäger-Division joined to the 352. Infanterie-Division in the defence battles of Saint-Lô. During the battle, the well trained, and equipped Fallschirmjägers caused heavy losses with their Panzerfaust 30s, and Panzerschrecks on the tank units of the U.S. 29th Infantry Division. Saint-Lô, the capital of the department of Manche, was captured by Task Force C of the U.S. 29th Infantry Division on July 18th, 1944.
I hope this shows you all you bunch of kids that german troops were not robot-like , as they want to show us in the movies... also they were not retarded... and they were actually better than most of the ally soldiers ( except for the last years of the war when they had to recruit children and old men... ) And they werent like the fucking allies that smiled when killed someone , at least most of them were just doing what they thought was defending their nation , almost non of them were nazi.
Lol none of them were nazi's? I'm sorry these men were not fighting for some notion of a Germany, they were fighting for NAZI Germany. Hitler had been in power sine 1933, anyone with half a brain knew just what Germany they were fighting for.
The majority of the young men who served in the German army spent their childhood being educated by the Nazi controlled education system, their entire world view was formed to fit Nazi Ideology. They were all nazi's.
I'd point out that being a Nazi does not equate someone to being a concentration camp guard. There is a difference in believing in the superiority of your culture and the inferiority of others and actually committing mass murder.
That said its ridiculous to think that most young Germans educated from their early teens in Nazi ideology did not believe any of it, its like saying American students don't really believe in democracy.
The Germans drafted many men into the military so they had no choice but to fight. The Fallschirmjager were voluntaries i believe so... come to your own conclusions about that.
My interview with a US Airborne trooper from the 502nd PIR he said that the Fallshirmjager fought the hardest, he believed they were equally if not better trained the himself.
At the same time if the German soldiers really had a problem with their national ideology it would have shown in high desertion rates. Every soldier drafted was versed in Nazi ideology, most of the drafted soldiers who made up the 1940 Battle of France Army or 1941 Barbarossa army were in their early or pre-teen years when Hitler came to power and the Nazi's began to HEAVILY indoctrinate the youth.
The notion that the German soldier was not political is nonsense, that is my point.
And the fact that despite so many people being in close contact none succeeded. The people who wanted to kill him, at least until the war had decidedly gone against Germany, was relatively minor, originally mostly the conservative military elite who did not like the Nazi's. But generals and foot soldiers are two different things. There are a number of really thought provoking books that examine the ideological indoctrination of the German youth., Hitlers Army is one.
Not sure if there is much info on that. For the most part desertions are tied in with POWs, since surrendering to the other side, depending on the country and front, was safer than trying to desert and go back home. Germany especially as the war went against her imposed very draconian punishments on her soldiers as well as creating a nazi "commissar" to reinforce the ideological will of the German soldiers to continue to resist.
high desertion rates?? oh fuck, you know nothing bout germany in that time. you were shot imediately for things much less serious than desertion. it wasnt like they had a choice. same with the people.
Yet the allies POW haul for Normandy was 200,000 Germans, For Tunisia at least 100,000 Germans along with similar Italian POWs, for the Scheldt campaign despite literally threats against the families of the soldiers by the German government (kith and kin law) 40,000 Germans surrendered. Ruhr Pocket some 300,000 POWs.
There obviously was a choice, at least against the western allies. But you are right, the Germans used draconian measures to keep their soldiers fighting.
For the Nazis it probably was the same thing, they increasingly made demands their soldiers fight to the death, and attempted to reinforce this by making threats against their families (kith and kin laws) as well as death threats against their actual soldiers.
Certainly there seems to have been little "fight to the death" mentality in the west beyond the SS units. After Falaise many allied units found German soldiers would generally surrender when their personal safety was threatened.
Hello, a cousin of my grandmother was with the fallschirmjagers because he thought it was better to join them than the wehrmacht, for the fallschirmjagers being seen as elite troops. I believe he got killed in Italy, or atleast thats what the telegram told his parents.
Hitler and his gang went through great lengths to indoctrinate the youth of Germany in schools. When not there Gobbles and his propaganda machine made sure to pound the message into the German people. In 1936 ALL boys were put into the Hitler Youth, and were continually indoctrinated.
All the young fit soldiers were well versed in Nazi Ideology. The notion they were patriotic Germans fighting for their country is only true when one sees they were patriotic nazi's fight for Nazi Germany.
I agree entirely with the exception of the "smiling when they killed someone" comment. on both sides there were natural killers, those who could shrug it off or enjoy themselves. But, besides those few, the war completely scarred all those who saw combat (trust me, I've interviewed veterans)
I think you will find few if any historians seriously would say such a thing. Germans in soviet captivity had it the worse of all German POWs, but even at worse you will find no credible author who puts German POW deaths at over 1 million, and in general they are listed as often below 400,000 in Russian camps.
Given total German KIA/MIA were 5 million that hardly suggests most German deaths were in POW camps.
At Mortain, of the 49 German tank wrecks left behind only 9 were found to have been KOed by rockets or bombs. In Falaise, some 377 German tanks were sampled by allied operational research groups. Some 180 of them were examined and a grand total of 18 were knocked out from rockets or bombs.
Air power in WWII was grossly ineffective at killing tanks, in general pilots overclaimed by a factor of 10. Many of the German claims of what their planes did to tanks have also been discredited.
my great uncle was in normandy and he said that we were losing so many people so fast they couldnt barely be replaced fast enough he said everytime you went somewhere a german sniper picked a few of you off, he said the germans werent no dumbies like movies make them out to be, the germans lost 400,000 soldiers on the western front didnt america alone lose that many soldiers just about? let alone britain,france, canada,belgium,denmark, austrailia, new zealand, india, poland,many nations fought
The OKW put down losses for the German army in the west until before the Ardennes offensive at near 800,000. Allied losses in that time were half that. German losses are double on account of the large prisoner hauls, especially the well over 100,000 soldiers who were trapped in the ports they were garrisoning after the allies surrounded them. Killed or wounded casualties were fairly similar, German POWs however doubled German losses.
i find it hard to believe the germans lost 2400 tanks in normandy, american movies are dumb the germans just run out and die cause the americans are just so damn good right, my question is if theres a couple million allies on the western front and not a million german soldiers how come every american soldier in the movie kills 10 20 or 30 germans man the germans would have run out of people in about 5 minutes if that was the case, when trumpets fade show true ww2 combat
You pretty much answered your own question. The truth usually lies in the middle. As for 2400 "tanks" I'm sure many were "armored vehicles" Remember the Falaise gap battles were after the real fighting in the Normandy campaign ended.
@kingtiger88 The "Real fighting" lol. You break the crust of the pie, and then you eat the pie. The Allies broke the crust by attacking, defeated German counterattacks, and then exploited the broken crust to kick the Germans out of most of France. The German logistics going backward were insufficient to keep up with the Allies going forward, hence the large numbers of German captured. The Germans couldn't run as fast at the Allies attacked.
Germans crossed the Sein river into Normandy with 2400 tanks and three months later retreated across the Sein with a hundred or two. It is very hard to nail down exactly German losses, the fact is the Germans went into Normandy with 2400 tanks and came out with very few of them.
@transamman1990 The same thing with the dumb russian movies, they show a man who rambo kills lost of Germans, in reality, the soviets were no challenge for a simple Wehrmacht soldier.
@transamman1990 just a third of an infantry division are combat troops. over 60% of these "couple of millions" were interpreters, cooks, truck drivers, air force ground crews, artillery gunners etcs. and the german losses on western front were 3 times higher than american.
At worse in the Falaise pocket only 50% of the tanks found there were KOed through AP rounds from guns and tanks, and that was a route. Two other British reports on Panther wrecks from June through to august found 75% of the tanks were knocked out from allied armor piercing shot, the other 25% from HEAT weapons, artillery, mines, aircraft, breakdown/self-destruction.
Any notion German armor was dying mostly to anything but allied tanks and guns is incorrect.
Correction to my earlier post, most of the falaise examined tanks were abandoned as stated in the same report done on the 180 wrecks by allied OR teams. I mixed it up with a comment from a book.
Allied tank losses in Normandy were 3000 tanks (roughly 1500 British and 1500 US tanks), German losses were around 2400, so it doesnt even break a kill death of 1.5.
Air power was notoriously unreliable in killing armor, allied OR reports found planes would have to launch 180 rockets to hit a tank, an accuracy rate of 0.55%. Air power ate up half tracks and trucks, but German armor was mainly KOed by armor.
@mzanolin not a colt 1911.....designed a 9mm version by FN and popular with the Germans when they could get them....looked outwardly the same but a 9mm.....funny to think about..early Luger was in the running for 1911 contract for US Army....2 Lugers 45 cal were made for demonstration...one is lost or wore out...other is the most valuble collectors gun....last auction for it was 2 + million about 30 years ago... lot more if auction again....
@DonMeaker sorry hit down thumb instead of reply....your are right a german immigrant came up with the mechanism (Hugo Borchardt) and built the un gainly but first automatic pistol the Borchardt.....I think he went back to Germany and worked for Mauser were he met co-worker Georg Luger and needing money for debts sold the rights to him....Luger then repositioned the mechanism into the handle and slanted it back and made the design into the best pistol of the era....
@DonMeaker Seems that its still happening. I seem to recall the USA/UK arming what is now TALIBAN to kill RUSSIANS in Afghanistan. Just shows what a lack of human morality does for a country. Those at the top need to seriously look at the ethics they DONT employ. The West are greedy fools still fighting wars that can NEVER be won.In fact it seems to be causing MORE unrest in the region. When will the Western Powers learn?
@stevobath Wrong. Taliban was created by Pakistani intelligence after the Soviets left Afghanistan. It was part of the Muslim vs. Anglo-Indian civil war that continues in Pakistan. Not to say that the people who were acting as the Afghan government were not corrupt. The old saying is you can not buy an Afghan, but you can rent one. What causes unrest is the corrupt religion that is Islam, and the perversion that it encourages. One appreciates the good government historically provided by Britain.
@DonMeaker Yes Britain really done a great thing with their Governing of the region & also the Middle East. Especially the creation of Israel. That hasnt caused problems at all! As for Afghanistan, youd have thought theyd have left well alone after the failed attempts in 19th C to bring order to what is an ungovernable country.As for our lasting legacy to India..partition & a way of governing thats famous for its reams of Red Tape.I think we're making things worse!
@stevobath Actually the creation of Israel was not by Britain. The Anglo-Indians were mostly thrown out of the Indian and Pakistani government. Red tape introduced by Clive and the Brits was superior to the solicitation of bribes that was common before. Don't worry, the method of using the government for the primary purpose of soliciting bribes for government officials is returning is returning. A system that requires documentation of every government act inhibits corruption,
@DonMeaker Ok UN idea.The Brits did control it after appropriating it from the Ottoman Empire but then decided to renage on the promise made to the Mufti of Jerusalem, of a Palestinian homeland/state. As for no corruption in Governments I have to disagree. You just have to look at the basics. British MPs expenses scandal for instance. There is ALWAYS corruption in all Gvts. Britain plundered India as a colonial power.Now the West are focused on the oil rich countries to exploit.IMO
@stevobath Palestine mandate was divided to provide Arab homeland: Jordan. Britain "plundered" India much less than the amount that the Indians plundered each other. The oil rich countries are only rich because of western technology used to find and remove the oil. Rather than stealing the oil, the western countries are buying it. "If this is torture, then chain me to the wall!"
@DonMeaker Thing is India was the Indians own country to do with as they pleased.As for 'torture' I never mentioned it! The West is reaping what it has sown as far as Im concerned. We have exploited certain countries over the years.Obviously oil is v. important to industrial nations who cares if the West provided the 'know how'? Fact is we are slaves to oil & its by products so we need to have some influence over these countries. Look what happens when OpEC lowers production?Gr8 to chat.Thanks:)
@stevobath India WAS the Indians to do with as they pleased. The various rajahs sold their country to the British, honest British administration passed the rajahs more than corrupt Indians. And so the Indian people did better, the rajahs did better, and the skim to the Empress was less than the skim to corrupt Indian officials. Now you claim that rather than enslaving Arabs, we are now the slaves. How about this: Oil enables high productivity, by which all benefit.
@DonMeaker I didnt mention enslaving Arabs.I suppose what Im saying is that the West has always seen where they can take advantage of the lack of unity in a country,& exploit it to some extent.The oil thing, well we are slaves to oil.All goods,food etc are directly linked to oil prices.We are already seeing the problems that come with that.The struggle for natural resources will bring about WW3.A high price for 'productivity' & those poorest who use less will suffer most which history has shown!
@stevobath You said we were exploiting Arabs, and we provide technology to extract the oil, and then pay the Arabs for the oil extracted at market rates. The struggle for resources will not bring about war, rather the illusion that resources should be provided in quantities in excess of that paid for at fair market rates could start a a war. The market allocates resources preferentially to the most productive, which is good for everyone.
@stevobath "if this is torture, chain me to the wall" was a humorous line in a movie, spoken by a dog character when someone was trying to convince him he was being exploited.
I just ´d like to know where was Russian front in D-Day. I know that US did a lot for Nazi defeat but 1944 they were pretty weakened by 3 years of war against the USSR.
Still think that Allies had a major advantaje, axis was lead by a corporal
What makes you think the west had any less fuel than the east? The Germans were abandoning tanks and trucks left and right in the east just as they were in the west. The difference was western allied air power was mainly focused on interdiction where as Soviet air power was primarily to support the armies. The Germans in the west had just as much fuel as those in the east, whether it actually got to the troops or was shot up is a different story.
LOL, at 0.21, that acting is as believable as Joan Collins in a Kubrick movie, what the hell was that ??? Propaganda idiocy, but kudos for the guy that fimed the actual battle sequences. But those staged inserts of soldiers in action are hillarious.
@satanic666sonic Yes, and that wasn't it. The reason I criticized the fakeness of some of the close-ups is to emphasize that,leaving the value of the actual footage aside,all these propaganda newsreels were ridiculously manipulative.Soldiers in war break down,cry,get high or drunk,shit and piss in their pants (literally and figuratively)and in some cases desert the battlefield and self-inflinct wounds.THAT's the reality of any battlefield,not heroic and focused action,not the organized teamwork.
@satanic666sonic Now,as for the Wehrmacht in WW2,they were a formidable fighting force,because of their training and simply because they were Germans and had German training.I'm not questioning that,but you guys comment on these newsreels as if you lived them.The truth is,we don't really know what went on there,history is written by the winner.There was alot of interest to portray the Germans as a formidable fighting force in history,they were outnumbered and outgunned,it would have made the...
If history was written by the victors I somehow doubt the German army would be seen as the amazing fighting force it is often portrayed as. In many ways much like the US civil war the Losers have written vast amounts of the history, especially in their attempt to absolve blame for German war time atrocities.
Mobile defense in the mind of maybe hitler, the Germans could never mechanize or even motorize any significant portion of their armed forces during WWII, and remained the only major combatant to rely nearly completely on foot and horse to move around. The only units doing mobile defense were the best equipped "elite" divisions that had motorized transport. The rest of the German forces were rapidly filling POW cages as the Russians overtook them.
The front line on the eastern front was over 1000 miles long at the beginning of Bagration. During the Normandy campaign the front line was a mere 40 miles long. Over 500,000 Germans stacked across a 40 miles long front is a HUGE concentration compared to 3 million across a 1000 miles front.
From June 44 onwards the Germans consistently stationed more men and tanks per kilometer in the west than the east. Overall the size of the east demanded more men and tanks than the west did however.
I cant tell if you actually read my post or not. I am not denying equipment and ammo shortages, I am saying its ridiculous to conclude the western forces somehow got shafted by the German industries. The Germans were facing manpower and equipment shortages across the board during '44. The western forces were no worse off than those in the east.
The SS units were generally well equipped and I would argue against the Notion the western units were under equipped in comparison to those in the east. France is MUCH closer to Germany than the frontline in the east was, and the industrial heartland of Germany was on the western boarder of Germany with france.
The Germans put roughly half their tanks into units in the west, and actually more turreted AFVs were west than east (most being assault guns).
Looks like it. A lot of this footage is from all over the place, including the british sector where you will see Sherman Fireflies and Sherman V series tanks (M4A4, not issued to US troops). Again its propaganda footage to boost morale at home, so its not exactly going to be stuff you can trust.
Yes but few were lost to hand held weapons like the Panzerfaust and Panzershrek . Allied examinations of tank losses from the campaign showed only some 8% of total losses were from High Explosive Anti-tank which include but are not limited to man portable rocket launchers. The notion those Paratroopers were killing masses of allied armor with their hand held AT weapons is ridiculous, but that is propaganda for you.
Other sources put the percentage of allied tanks destroyed by handheld AT weapons much higher. Remember that it was not just panzerfausts and panzerschrecks being used. There is a whole other array of weaponry used by German infantry to destroy tanks e.g. magnetic mines, recoiless rifles etc
Also there is lots of evidence and personal testimonies from allied tankers who claim the German tank hunter teams took a heavy toal on allied armor, coupled with the fact that most German handheld AT
weapons were in abundance (namely the panzerfaust) and were easy to operate and excelled in the bocage terrain of Normandy. I wouldnt say it is ridiculous that German Paras destroyed masses of allied tanks. Afterall the Fallschirmjaeger excelled in close quarters combat and were trained on how to deal with enemy armour at close quarters which is what they were doing in the Norman bocage.
True but all those weapons tended to be High Explosive Anti-Tank devices. The 8% figure is including all forms of rocket projectiles as well as most types of mines used that were not buried. The German paras were no doubt well trained and capable of inflicting high losses on armor in such close country but its quite obvious it was other weapons such as tanks and Anti-tank guns (combined 70% of losses) and even mines (accounted for 15% of all losses) that were hurting allied armor the most.
The Tiger was a good tank but a bad idea. The Sherman was easy to build and maintain and there were a lot of them. The tiger was hard to build and maintain and not many got built.
The germans were the best anti-tank infantry soldiers of any side during WW2. I believe this is largely due to necessity and having to face Russian T-34 tanks which were overall very sound.
The Germans had the best shoulder fired anti tank weapons of the war. When Allied troops came across caches of Panzerfausts, they would readily use them.
The Russians also possessed fine anti-tank infantry. They were the ones who developed many of the anti-tank tactics used for most of the war. The Germans had first hand knowledge of these tactics after facing and adopting them on the eastern front, and used them to devastating effect on allied armour in the west.
I loved Svaing Pvt.Ryan.However, barley mentioned the Biritsh even being there. Typical American style. But showed only one side. Maybe a Das Boot style movie can be produced someday.
Yes. Saving Private Ryan was a very good movie, with great performances, deadly accurate stage design, and epic scope. As for telling two or more sides, directors have tried that in war movies (We Were Soldiers, plus Thin Red Line had mutiple perspectives), and it really makes the movies feel crammed. Just one side of Normandy is a long story to tell.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Hitler was a fucking disaster for Europe !! were in the mess we are now in !! because of HIM!! i hate him for the last European ciliv war that took so much out off us !! lets for get him!!
yes, your right, he was a monster, and the biggest of all! but to forget him means, to forget all, who fights agenst him! If you forget the past, you will do the same misstakes agen!
Yeah...you are right. He was a monster. But in the 30's he managed to have a nation that had work, food, water and people had jobs...and they loved him for it. Can we say that about our leaders today? No.
He was smart in that way...but what he actually did to the Jewish and others alike, that was wrong on many levels.
The German army was well trained and fought hard with good tanks and equipment, but it shows in the end that a small nation cannot fight on 2 or more fronts. My 2 pennies.
and why was the Monte Cassino and Dresden thing a stupid statement.Oh lemme get it if the Germans did it first its ok to bomb monastery's with zero military value and helpless civilians ah.. ok :P."Your boys" as you call them were perfect.. the germans were evil i get the point.. end of story
Interesting video. In response to some of the comments here, the Fallschirmjager veterans typically had the cutoff stahlhelm, whereas newer troopers recieved either the cutoff or the standard m1934 stahlhelm depending on availability. However it does seem to be a mixed set of films, certainly there are a few discrepencies in the way it's cut here and there i.e the cromwells but I'm not sure that there are SS troops, there wasn't really a standard camo scheme any more by late 43. (availability)
ah yes, you have good eyes junge. Hadn't spotted that before so, yes, there are SS troops in the video. The Italian come is a little surprising, but not wholly so. After all, you used what you had from 43 onwards. I've seen photos and film of guys with a mix of several different periods of uniform and camo, never mind weapons.
yup !! credited in 12 th ss in bilt (veterans of the division journal, from memory think they name the troopers) , but soz not the trooper to the left , the other guy !! he has dark Italian camo trousers !! stolen from Italian stocks while the division had its shake down in Northern Italy just prior to committal on the invasion front ...
actually, when I looked at the video I did wonder what you meant by "trooper to the viewers left" when, as you say, the guy on the right had the Italian trousers. Still, it's fascinating to see these sorts of films.
hihi bin so geil
TresaThuyiv387 2 months ago
yes, I guess the guys in the panzer grenadier (with the rim coming down over the ears) helmets are heer, its a bit of a medley and I suspect its not a real series of events. After the attack has started there are shots of very casual looking troops wandering along and the Shermans would have become more cautious than to keep racing along a road, would probably have pulled back and wated for infantry support. Real footage just edited to create the narrative for a news/propanga film.
TheRhandolph 8 months ago
@TheRhandolph indeed. its hard to find decent combat footage of the wehrmacht without it having been manipulated by Herr Goebbels. such a shame
satanic666sonic 3 months ago
whonins die panzer faust
lonefreeze 11 months ago
Hey do you guys know just how many Shemans were destroyed during the war ???
ANSWER : NOT E_N_O_U_G_H ! !
Thumbs up if you agree ! !
88.
Cottonboy88 1 year ago
German soldiers were highly trained in ww2 with a raw recruit normally having 6 months training minimum (not during late in the war when Germany started losing) and 1 German private can probably take down 3 American corporals with a Luger before getting shot all these movies and games are boring because 1 private takes on a army with only 2 weeks of training btw the soviets, uk and usa and the other nations ( rest of the allies) depended on numbers not skill
bloodknight1996 1 year ago
@bloodknight1996 That is why the US lost less than 300,000 combat deaths, and Germany lost 3.6 million... pull the other one, it has bells on it.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
your a fool, most of germanys troops didnt even wana fight, and wer inferior to western allied troops in almost every way, the germans had some elite volenteer fighting squads, but those wer a small % of the entire german army and wer mostly wasted in the early stages of the war on the eastern front... when the english invaded france, all germany had left was little kids and old men with shitty training, as for numbers not skill, that was just russia, canadian soldiers trained for years
101andrewj 1 year ago
Actually, this one I know was staged with captured Sherman tanks, and isn't real, but still its pretty realistic...
Craig60918 1 year ago
Most people in Germany didn't know about the Jews in death camps why because of it being a secret
soap1on1a1rope1 1 year ago
@warmadscot Sure looks like there are some Luftwaffe fallshirmjager in this footage!
kyokogodai 1 year ago
a goliath! ive always wanted to see one of those in real action, thx for this one :)
justy2714 1 year ago
BLAH,BLAH,BLAH,people keep on talikng about the German Army as if they are experts most Germans fought for their Country and not for Hitler a big difference from the Wehrmact and the Waffen SS name me one person who would not answer the call to arms ? unless they were traitors.......
ddm3542 1 year ago
And what did Germany represent in 1939? Stripping citizenship from German WWI veterans because they were Jewish. The racism of the Nuremburg laws. Revoking the rights of every Germans guaranteed by their constitution through emergency decree. The imprisoning of people who had different political views.
Oh yeah Nazi Germany was something to be proud to fight for. No I am sorry, no respect for fighting for that, especially when many Germans didn't and died for that choice.
Mcplkelly 1 year ago
@ Mcplkelly Most of them chose to. But the things like jews at the death camps they did not know. that it is not like in the movies and books.
soap1on1a1rope1 1 year ago
Again they knew of the racial Nuremberg laws, kristallnacht, the loss of their own civil rights by Nazi emergency decree, and that their country waged a war of aggression against neutral states like Denmark and Belgium all prior to Barbarossa. They knew their government had spies among them to look for dissent (gestapo), they knew there were camps were political enemies were held.
Many Germans chose not to fight for that, and were put in camps (ie Konrad Adenauer), they are owed respect.
Mcplkelly 1 year ago
@Mcplkelly The Germans also knew doctors were under orders to "put down" the retarded, the sick, the crippled. FDR would have been murdered, and Hitler, with his one testicle was offended that FDR the cripple, and Stalin with his useless arm were defeating him.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@Mcplkelly Different times, my friend. Germans were raIsed with a sense of duty, back then, to country. This was regardless of the government/regime in charge. Some, like Stauffenberg, came to their senses too late. So, they had to go to extreme measures to try and stop the war. Later in the war, it was either the will to survive or the brainwashed youth that kept the fighting going. The average German was fighting for country, despite laws against the Jews. Just the way it was.
kyokogodai 1 year ago
Maybe but blind obedience to one's country is not a respectable trait, especially when so much of what was wrong with Nazi Germany was plain to see. The real German heroes are those who saw Nazi Germany for what it was and refused to accept it. Many languished in camps because of it, such as Konrad Adenauer, first chancellor of west Germany, or Sophie Scholl. Had more Germans been like them WWII and the holocaust never would have happened.
Mcplkelly 1 year ago
@Mcplkelly I cannot disagree with your statement, as is. However, we are looking at it from hindsight. We were not there. The majority supported Hitler. A soldier's duty is to his leader, of which those soldiers took an oath to follow. Like I stated earlier, too many of those soldiers came to their senses far too late to change the outcome of the war. As for "many" languishing in camps, there were not that many, as compared to the Jews/Gypsies/Slavs/Poles. Not nearly as many.
kyokogodai 1 year ago
Not many mainly because few were willing to resist. I do agree with much of what you say, I personally can't even remember where this conversation started, but my original comments were probably directed at those who feel the German soldier of WWII deserves the same level of respect as allied soldiers, a sentiment I disagree with. While I can understand why the Germans fought, I can't respect them for the reasons I listed. I respect those who resisted hitler and fought against him, not for him.
Mcplkelly 1 year ago
@Mcplkelly I've been reading a book by Victor Klemperer (1881-1960), LTI - Lingua Tertii Imperii, or translated as"The Language of the Third Reich." It is very interesting about how the Nazis created the culture that would make their soldiers (and people) fight for Hitler. I would reccommend it to you, so you might better grasp my point of view about Germany of that time. No human being believes that they would do the same. I say some are doing the same, right now, all over the world.
kyokogodai 1 year ago
@warmadscot Yes, look at their collars at 1:59.
panamajack7X 1 year ago
Was not a Colt .45 but another Browning design called a Browning High-power 9mm
bubba541 1 year ago
@bubba541
It was actually a P35 Radom, made by a Polish manufacturer. (It is the Hi-Power design, though)
trav12th 1 year ago
poor basterds
rla1978x 1 year ago
@dixxjamn,
i agree 100% with you. youve expressed my opinion on that topic perfectly.
but what do you mean by allies look ridiculous??
satanic666sonic 2 years ago
Well, I mean, when the enemy inflicts so many casualties in your army,puts up a helluva fight though they are outnumbered,outgunned, have almost no air cover and their boss is the biggest loon of the century, you're not going to say that that army is crap,because the question arises: "So why the hell was it so hard for you to kick their ass?" The truth is,the only armies in WW2 that had real dedicated soldiers were the Germans and the Russians,for obvious reasons.
dixxjamm 2 years ago
I disagree, the western citizen soldier was quite dedicated to winning the war. Theirs was not a racial war however, and they didnt waste their lives in hopeless situations like the Germans or Soviets may have.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
Being drafted (or volunteering,for that matter) and ending up in a war IS a hopeless situation.Sure,there are circumstances and there are statistics,but in principle,it;s the same thing.And you're kidding about the racial or ideological issue;the Western powers had their propaganda too, c'mon....
dixxjamm 2 years ago
What propaganda, its pretty well known the Nazi Government had a racial and ideological agenda, and that there were many Germans who bought in to it.
Really since the 80's there has been a real close examination of the role of the Wehrmacht as a willing participant in Nazi Genocidal policies. Most of the young conscripts in the Wehrmacht would have spent their teen years being taught in the Nazi School system which was highly ideological.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
2. Oh, and the Japanese. Having said that, the Allies did make a mess out of things, when you put it in perspective...at the beginning of the war, they underestimated the enemy, then they had a very hard time organizing, and when it came to the actual fighting, well, you be the judge of that, with Patton and Montgomery racing each other and letting the Soviets occupy Eastern Europe....
dixxjamm 2 years ago
"But Germany has got more soldiers!" Sorry I would like to said that: Germany has got more trained soldiers.
Andrew4555 2 years ago
What do you mean exactly? :-| Even in this war rather the men count! ;-) The U.S. could have: a lot of vehicles (tanks, aeroplanes, ships etc...), more men. But Germany has got more soldiers! Have you seen the movie 300? There is a conversation between King Leonidas and Xerxes, during the break of the Battle of Thermopylae. This quote is a case in point. "You have many slaves, Xerxes, but few warriors." ;-)
Andrew4555 2 years ago
But the Fallschirm-Jäger-Regiment 6 was a famous unit too in the Battles of Normandy. Because of their actions at the Battle of Carentan (June 1014, 1944).
Andrew4555 2 years ago
And these German soldiers were ready to fight. A battalion commander in the 29th remarked to an unbelieving counterpart from another regiment, "Those Germans are the best soldiers I ever saw. They're smart and they don't know what the word 'fear' means. They come in and they keep coming until they get their job done or you kill'em."
Andrew4555 2 years ago
Rifle companies in the FJ had twenty MG 42s and 43 submachine guns; rifle companies in the 29th had two machine guns and nine BARs. At the squad level, the GIs had a single BAR; the German parachute squad had two MG 42s and three submachine guns. The Germans had three times as many mortars as the Americans, and heavier ones. So in any encounter between equal numbers of Americans and Fallschirmjäger, the Germans had from six to twenty times as much firepower.
Andrew4555 2 years ago
@Andrew4555 mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm what about air power? what about industry? what about manpower? what about logistic? lol
Panz82 2 years ago
The city was an important strategic objective, and was heavily damaged during the Battle of Normandy. The Fallschirmjäger were perhaps the best-armed infantrymen in the world in 1944. The 3rd FJ had 930 light machine guns, eleven times as many as its chief opponent, the U.S. 29th Division.
Andrew4555 2 years ago
n June 1944 the 3. Fallschrim-Jäger-Division joined to the 352. Infanterie-Division in the defence battles of Saint-Lô. During the battle, the well trained, and equipped Fallschirmjägers caused heavy losses with their Panzerfaust 30s, and Panzerschrecks on the tank units of the U.S. 29th Infantry Division. Saint-Lô, the capital of the department of Manche, was captured by Task Force C of the U.S. 29th Infantry Division on July 18th, 1944.
Andrew4555 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Lady and Getlemen, we're listening to the Legendary voice of Harry Giese.
ThePanzerWarMachine 2 years ago
which ones?
kingtiger88 2 years ago
I guess private ryan couldn;'t get to them on time, reality is so different from the moveis.
Cansseco 2 years ago
I hope this shows you all you bunch of kids that german troops were not robot-like , as they want to show us in the movies... also they were not retarded... and they were actually better than most of the ally soldiers ( except for the last years of the war when they had to recruit children and old men... ) And they werent like the fucking allies that smiled when killed someone , at least most of them were just doing what they thought was defending their nation , almost non of them were nazi.
OrkKaiser 2 years ago
Lol none of them were nazi's? I'm sorry these men were not fighting for some notion of a Germany, they were fighting for NAZI Germany. Hitler had been in power sine 1933, anyone with half a brain knew just what Germany they were fighting for.
The majority of the young men who served in the German army spent their childhood being educated by the Nazi controlled education system, their entire world view was formed to fit Nazi Ideology. They were all nazi's.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
True. My grandfather's father left Germany just before Titler rose power in a disagreement with his brother cuz the brother became an SS officer.
tmatzko 2 years ago
lol crazy????? they were nnot all nazis!!!
shut the fuck up idiot
Tonoba 2 years ago
Wow, excellent counter evidence offered! *rolls eyes*
I'd point out that being a Nazi does not equate someone to being a concentration camp guard. There is a difference in believing in the superiority of your culture and the inferiority of others and actually committing mass murder.
That said its ridiculous to think that most young Germans educated from their early teens in Nazi ideology did not believe any of it, its like saying American students don't really believe in democracy.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
a few things for OrkKaiser and Mcplkelly:
The Germans drafted many men into the military so they had no choice but to fight. The Fallschirmjager were voluntaries i believe so... come to your own conclusions about that.
My interview with a US Airborne trooper from the 502nd PIR he said that the Fallshirmjager fought the hardest, he believed they were equally if not better trained the himself.
Just wanted to put that out there.
thewwiiguy 2 years ago
At the same time if the German soldiers really had a problem with their national ideology it would have shown in high desertion rates. Every soldier drafted was versed in Nazi ideology, most of the drafted soldiers who made up the 1940 Battle of France Army or 1941 Barbarossa army were in their early or pre-teen years when Hitler came to power and the Nazi's began to HEAVILY indoctrinate the youth.
The notion that the German soldier was not political is nonsense, that is my point.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
Well then explain why there were so many plots by to kill Hitler.... by Germans themselves
btw... lets keep this civilized (we are going a good job so far LOL)
thewwiiguy 2 years ago
And the fact that despite so many people being in close contact none succeeded. The people who wanted to kill him, at least until the war had decidedly gone against Germany, was relatively minor, originally mostly the conservative military elite who did not like the Nazi's. But generals and foot soldiers are two different things. There are a number of really thought provoking books that examine the ideological indoctrination of the German youth., Hitlers Army is one.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
so how many british, french, yanks deserted?
nookiex6 2 years ago
Not sure if there is much info on that. For the most part desertions are tied in with POWs, since surrendering to the other side, depending on the country and front, was safer than trying to desert and go back home. Germany especially as the war went against her imposed very draconian punishments on her soldiers as well as creating a nazi "commissar" to reinforce the ideological will of the German soldiers to continue to resist.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
high desertion rates?? oh fuck, you know nothing bout germany in that time. you were shot imediately for things much less serious than desertion. it wasnt like they had a choice. same with the people.
satanic666sonic 2 years ago
Yet the allies POW haul for Normandy was 200,000 Germans, For Tunisia at least 100,000 Germans along with similar Italian POWs, for the Scheldt campaign despite literally threats against the families of the soldiers by the German government (kith and kin law) 40,000 Germans surrendered. Ruhr Pocket some 300,000 POWs.
There obviously was a choice, at least against the western allies. But you are right, the Germans used draconian measures to keep their soldiers fighting.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
yeah but surrendering is not equal to deserting. thats what i mean.
satanic666sonic 2 years ago
For the Nazis it probably was the same thing, they increasingly made demands their soldiers fight to the death, and attempted to reinforce this by making threats against their families (kith and kin laws) as well as death threats against their actual soldiers.
Certainly there seems to have been little "fight to the death" mentality in the west beyond the SS units. After Falaise many allied units found German soldiers would generally surrender when their personal safety was threatened.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
Hello, a cousin of my grandmother was with the fallschirmjagers because he thought it was better to join them than the wehrmacht, for the fallschirmjagers being seen as elite troops. I believe he got killed in Italy, or atleast thats what the telegram told his parents.
RedEyezz2 2 years ago
Hitler and his gang went through great lengths to indoctrinate the youth of Germany in schools. When not there Gobbles and his propaganda machine made sure to pound the message into the German people. In 1936 ALL boys were put into the Hitler Youth, and were continually indoctrinated.
All the young fit soldiers were well versed in Nazi Ideology. The notion they were patriotic Germans fighting for their country is only true when one sees they were patriotic nazi's fight for Nazi Germany.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
I agree entirely with the exception of the "smiling when they killed someone" comment. on both sides there were natural killers, those who could shrug it off or enjoy themselves. But, besides those few, the war completely scarred all those who saw combat (trust me, I've interviewed veterans)
smsteve888 2 years ago
You can really tell the differance from the Fallschirmjager and the Heer, look at the helmets and uniforms.
rdvd7 2 years ago
@ all guys here: if you want to know, in which battle our old army lost most tanks, than you´ve to read the book : Panzerschlacht auf der Krim.
Fastline1000 2 years ago
I think you will find few if any historians seriously would say such a thing. Germans in soviet captivity had it the worse of all German POWs, but even at worse you will find no credible author who puts German POW deaths at over 1 million, and in general they are listed as often below 400,000 in Russian camps.
Given total German KIA/MIA were 5 million that hardly suggests most German deaths were in POW camps.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
At Mortain, of the 49 German tank wrecks left behind only 9 were found to have been KOed by rockets or bombs. In Falaise, some 377 German tanks were sampled by allied operational research groups. Some 180 of them were examined and a grand total of 18 were knocked out from rockets or bombs.
Air power in WWII was grossly ineffective at killing tanks, in general pilots overclaimed by a factor of 10. Many of the German claims of what their planes did to tanks have also been discredited.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
my great uncle was in normandy and he said that we were losing so many people so fast they couldnt barely be replaced fast enough he said everytime you went somewhere a german sniper picked a few of you off, he said the germans werent no dumbies like movies make them out to be, the germans lost 400,000 soldiers on the western front didnt america alone lose that many soldiers just about? let alone britain,france, canada,belgium,denmark, austrailia, new zealand, india, poland,many nations fought
transamman1990 2 years ago
The OKW put down losses for the German army in the west until before the Ardennes offensive at near 800,000. Allied losses in that time were half that. German losses are double on account of the large prisoner hauls, especially the well over 100,000 soldiers who were trapped in the ports they were garrisoning after the allies surrounded them. Killed or wounded casualties were fairly similar, German POWs however doubled German losses.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
i find it hard to believe the germans lost 2400 tanks in normandy, american movies are dumb the germans just run out and die cause the americans are just so damn good right, my question is if theres a couple million allies on the western front and not a million german soldiers how come every american soldier in the movie kills 10 20 or 30 germans man the germans would have run out of people in about 5 minutes if that was the case, when trumpets fade show true ww2 combat
transamman1990 2 years ago 2
You pretty much answered your own question. The truth usually lies in the middle. As for 2400 "tanks" I'm sure many were "armored vehicles" Remember the Falaise gap battles were after the real fighting in the Normandy campaign ended.
kingtiger88 2 years ago
@kingtiger88 The "Real fighting" lol. You break the crust of the pie, and then you eat the pie. The Allies broke the crust by attacking, defeated German counterattacks, and then exploited the broken crust to kick the Germans out of most of France. The German logistics going backward were insufficient to keep up with the Allies going forward, hence the large numbers of German captured. The Germans couldn't run as fast at the Allies attacked.
DonMeaker 8 months ago
Germans crossed the Sein river into Normandy with 2400 tanks and three months later retreated across the Sein with a hundred or two. It is very hard to nail down exactly German losses, the fact is the Germans went into Normandy with 2400 tanks and came out with very few of them.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
@transamman1990 The same thing with the dumb russian movies, they show a man who rambo kills lost of Germans, in reality, the soviets were no challenge for a simple Wehrmacht soldier.
Sarranid 1 year ago
@transamman1990 just a third of an infantry division are combat troops. over 60% of these "couple of millions" were interpreters, cooks, truck drivers, air force ground crews, artillery gunners etcs. and the german losses on western front were 3 times higher than american.
thrashorbethrashed 1 year ago
At worse in the Falaise pocket only 50% of the tanks found there were KOed through AP rounds from guns and tanks, and that was a route. Two other British reports on Panther wrecks from June through to august found 75% of the tanks were knocked out from allied armor piercing shot, the other 25% from HEAT weapons, artillery, mines, aircraft, breakdown/self-destruction.
Any notion German armor was dying mostly to anything but allied tanks and guns is incorrect.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
Correction to my earlier post, most of the falaise examined tanks were abandoned as stated in the same report done on the 180 wrecks by allied OR teams. I mixed it up with a comment from a book.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
Allied tank losses in Normandy were 3000 tanks (roughly 1500 British and 1500 US tanks), German losses were around 2400, so it doesnt even break a kill death of 1.5.
Air power was notoriously unreliable in killing armor, allied OR reports found planes would have to launch 180 rockets to hit a tank, an accuracy rate of 0.55%. Air power ate up half tracks and trucks, but German armor was mainly KOed by armor.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's quite interesting to look at second 0:09 of the film, a german paratrooper with a Colt 1911 in his hand.
Hard times for those soldiers!
mzanolin 2 years ago
It's quite interesting to look at 9 second of the film a german paratrooper with a Colt 1911 in his right hand. Hard times for those soldiers!
mzanolin 2 years ago
Hopefully for his sake he doesn't get caught.
kingtiger88 2 years ago
Looks more like a Browning HP/Inglis than a 1911, it also used the same ammunition the germans use.
493175001 2 years ago
@mzanolin
That's a Belgian FN Browning, they were in use in the German Army, although in smaller numbers.
DaveBaker1987 1 year ago
@DaveBaker1987 Thanks for your answer.
I didn't know that.
I think it looks like that germans didn't have enough weapon at that moment of the war.
mzanolin 1 year ago
@mzanolin That wasn't a colt, but a belgian built Browing Hi-Power, which were issued to the fallschirmjagers.
Thys93Dutchy 1 year ago
@Thys93Dutchy Thanks for the comment!
mzanolin 1 year ago
@mzanolin not a colt 1911.....designed a 9mm version by FN and popular with the Germans when they could get them....looked outwardly the same but a 9mm.....funny to think about..early Luger was in the running for 1911 contract for US Army....2 Lugers 45 cal were made for demonstration...one is lost or wore out...other is the most valuble collectors gun....last auction for it was 2 + million about 30 years ago... lot more if auction again....
crpdst2003 1 year ago
@crpdst2003 luger was an American. The first machinegun to open up on the US forces at Omaha was a Browning.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@DonMeaker sorry hit down thumb instead of reply....your are right a german immigrant came up with the mechanism (Hugo Borchardt) and built the un gainly but first automatic pistol the Borchardt.....I think he went back to Germany and worked for Mauser were he met co-worker Georg Luger and needing money for debts sold the rights to him....Luger then repositioned the mechanism into the handle and slanted it back and made the design into the best pistol of the era....
crpdst2003 1 year ago
@DonMeaker Seems that its still happening. I seem to recall the USA/UK arming what is now TALIBAN to kill RUSSIANS in Afghanistan. Just shows what a lack of human morality does for a country. Those at the top need to seriously look at the ethics they DONT employ. The West are greedy fools still fighting wars that can NEVER be won.In fact it seems to be causing MORE unrest in the region. When will the Western Powers learn?
stevobath 8 months ago
@stevobath Wrong. Taliban was created by Pakistani intelligence after the Soviets left Afghanistan. It was part of the Muslim vs. Anglo-Indian civil war that continues in Pakistan. Not to say that the people who were acting as the Afghan government were not corrupt. The old saying is you can not buy an Afghan, but you can rent one. What causes unrest is the corrupt religion that is Islam, and the perversion that it encourages. One appreciates the good government historically provided by Britain.
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@DonMeaker Yes Britain really done a great thing with their Governing of the region & also the Middle East. Especially the creation of Israel. That hasnt caused problems at all! As for Afghanistan, youd have thought theyd have left well alone after the failed attempts in 19th C to bring order to what is an ungovernable country.As for our lasting legacy to India..partition & a way of governing thats famous for its reams of Red Tape.I think we're making things worse!
stevobath 8 months ago
@stevobath Actually the creation of Israel was not by Britain. The Anglo-Indians were mostly thrown out of the Indian and Pakistani government. Red tape introduced by Clive and the Brits was superior to the solicitation of bribes that was common before. Don't worry, the method of using the government for the primary purpose of soliciting bribes for government officials is returning is returning. A system that requires documentation of every government act inhibits corruption,
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@DonMeaker Ok UN idea.The Brits did control it after appropriating it from the Ottoman Empire but then decided to renage on the promise made to the Mufti of Jerusalem, of a Palestinian homeland/state. As for no corruption in Governments I have to disagree. You just have to look at the basics. British MPs expenses scandal for instance. There is ALWAYS corruption in all Gvts. Britain plundered India as a colonial power.Now the West are focused on the oil rich countries to exploit.IMO
stevobath 8 months ago
@stevobath Palestine mandate was divided to provide Arab homeland: Jordan. Britain "plundered" India much less than the amount that the Indians plundered each other. The oil rich countries are only rich because of western technology used to find and remove the oil. Rather than stealing the oil, the western countries are buying it. "If this is torture, then chain me to the wall!"
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@DonMeaker Thing is India was the Indians own country to do with as they pleased.As for 'torture' I never mentioned it! The West is reaping what it has sown as far as Im concerned. We have exploited certain countries over the years.Obviously oil is v. important to industrial nations who cares if the West provided the 'know how'? Fact is we are slaves to oil & its by products so we need to have some influence over these countries. Look what happens when OpEC lowers production?Gr8 to chat.Thanks:)
stevobath 8 months ago
@stevobath India WAS the Indians to do with as they pleased. The various rajahs sold their country to the British, honest British administration passed the rajahs more than corrupt Indians. And so the Indian people did better, the rajahs did better, and the skim to the Empress was less than the skim to corrupt Indian officials. Now you claim that rather than enslaving Arabs, we are now the slaves. How about this: Oil enables high productivity, by which all benefit.
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@DonMeaker I didnt mention enslaving Arabs.I suppose what Im saying is that the West has always seen where they can take advantage of the lack of unity in a country,& exploit it to some extent.The oil thing, well we are slaves to oil.All goods,food etc are directly linked to oil prices.We are already seeing the problems that come with that.The struggle for natural resources will bring about WW3.A high price for 'productivity' & those poorest who use less will suffer most which history has shown!
stevobath 8 months ago
@stevobath You said we were exploiting Arabs, and we provide technology to extract the oil, and then pay the Arabs for the oil extracted at market rates. The struggle for resources will not bring about war, rather the illusion that resources should be provided in quantities in excess of that paid for at fair market rates could start a a war. The market allocates resources preferentially to the most productive, which is good for everyone.
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@stevobath GAY JESUS WANTS YOU TO CONFESS YOUR SINS ON HIS CHANNEL :)
REMEMBER HE LOVES YOU♥
CHURCHOFGAYJESUS 8 months ago
@stevobath "if this is torture, chain me to the wall" was a humorous line in a movie, spoken by a dog character when someone was trying to convince him he was being exploited.
DonMeaker 8 months ago
@mzanolin
Looks like a Browning HP. He may very well have been issued that pistol.
ranger89 1 year ago
@mzanolin Germany used Browning hi powers from belgium and .45ACP pistols from Normandy
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@mzanolin its not 45 colt 1911, its a belgian browning HP. over 10% of the german weaponry were "beutewaffen" from allover europe.
thrashorbethrashed 1 year ago
@mzanolin I think that was a 9mm Browning Hi-Power, even weirder
martin1226 10 months ago
@mzanolin it is not colt 1911,actually it is browning hi power..look how thin is in front....
sinkosav 9 months ago
@sinkosav Although the Germans did use a 1911, made by Norway and stolen by Germany from their armories. It was very popular.
DonMeaker 8 months ago
Achja ich sag nur: Infantrie, du bist die Krone aller Waffen!
Ewig lebt der toten Tatenruhm
Frontjunker 2 years ago 3
Thx for loading this man!
moOswe 2 years ago
I just ´d like to know where was Russian front in D-Day. I know that US did a lot for Nazi defeat but 1944 they were pretty weakened by 3 years of war against the USSR.
Still think that Allies had a major advantaje, axis was lead by a corporal
mig15fan 2 years ago
Actually it was 103 tigers that were commited in normandy.
fallschirmjager0000 2 years ago
What makes you think the west had any less fuel than the east? The Germans were abandoning tanks and trucks left and right in the east just as they were in the west. The difference was western allied air power was mainly focused on interdiction where as Soviet air power was primarily to support the armies. The Germans in the west had just as much fuel as those in the east, whether it actually got to the troops or was shot up is a different story.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
This a really really good propaganda!! Nazis really knew the meaning of the word propaganda!!
mihaelmartinovic 2 years ago
propaganda or not, the germans destroyed american tanks right left and center-thats fact
fallschirmjager0000 2 years ago
LOL, at 0.21, that acting is as believable as Joan Collins in a Kubrick movie, what the hell was that ??? Propaganda idiocy, but kudos for the guy that fimed the actual battle sequences. But those staged inserts of soldiers in action are hillarious.
dixxjamm 2 years ago
ever heard of the 1000yard stare??
satanic666sonic 2 years ago
@satanic666sonic Yes, and that wasn't it. The reason I criticized the fakeness of some of the close-ups is to emphasize that,leaving the value of the actual footage aside,all these propaganda newsreels were ridiculously manipulative.Soldiers in war break down,cry,get high or drunk,shit and piss in their pants (literally and figuratively)and in some cases desert the battlefield and self-inflinct wounds.THAT's the reality of any battlefield,not heroic and focused action,not the organized teamwork.
dixxjamm 2 years ago
@satanic666sonic Now,as for the Wehrmacht in WW2,they were a formidable fighting force,because of their training and simply because they were Germans and had German training.I'm not questioning that,but you guys comment on these newsreels as if you lived them.The truth is,we don't really know what went on there,history is written by the winner.There was alot of interest to portray the Germans as a formidable fighting force in history,they were outnumbered and outgunned,it would have made the...
dixxjamm 2 years ago
If history was written by the victors I somehow doubt the German army would be seen as the amazing fighting force it is often portrayed as. In many ways much like the US civil war the Losers have written vast amounts of the history, especially in their attempt to absolve blame for German war time atrocities.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
@satanic666sonic ...Allies look ridiculous,don't you think? Maybe you guys should see and interpret history with more caution...
dixxjamm 2 years ago
a good historic video!
panzerspahwagen 2 years ago
Mobile defense in the mind of maybe hitler, the Germans could never mechanize or even motorize any significant portion of their armed forces during WWII, and remained the only major combatant to rely nearly completely on foot and horse to move around. The only units doing mobile defense were the best equipped "elite" divisions that had motorized transport. The rest of the German forces were rapidly filling POW cages as the Russians overtook them.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
The front line on the eastern front was over 1000 miles long at the beginning of Bagration. During the Normandy campaign the front line was a mere 40 miles long. Over 500,000 Germans stacked across a 40 miles long front is a HUGE concentration compared to 3 million across a 1000 miles front.
From June 44 onwards the Germans consistently stationed more men and tanks per kilometer in the west than the east. Overall the size of the east demanded more men and tanks than the west did however.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
00:24 XD Panzerchreck
UaeDevil001 2 years ago
I cant tell if you actually read my post or not. I am not denying equipment and ammo shortages, I am saying its ridiculous to conclude the western forces somehow got shafted by the German industries. The Germans were facing manpower and equipment shortages across the board during '44. The western forces were no worse off than those in the east.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
The SS units were generally well equipped and I would argue against the Notion the western units were under equipped in comparison to those in the east. France is MUCH closer to Germany than the frontline in the east was, and the industrial heartland of Germany was on the western boarder of Germany with france.
The Germans put roughly half their tanks into units in the west, and actually more turreted AFVs were west than east (most being assault guns).
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
Very interesting clip. Unless this was staged with captured tanks, to be so close to the enemy with the cameras rolling is remarkable.
I am wondering if the 2nd and 3rd Sherman is actually the same shot repeated.
ppsh43 2 years ago
Looks like it. A lot of this footage is from all over the place, including the british sector where you will see Sherman Fireflies and Sherman V series tanks (M4A4, not issued to US troops). Again its propaganda footage to boost morale at home, so its not exactly going to be stuff you can trust.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
It's not untrue. They just don't how everything.
samipso 2 years ago
propaganda or not, the Germans destroyed huge amounts of allied armour in normandy-especially in the bocage.
fallschirmjager0000 2 years ago 7
Yes but few were lost to hand held weapons like the Panzerfaust and Panzershrek . Allied examinations of tank losses from the campaign showed only some 8% of total losses were from High Explosive Anti-tank which include but are not limited to man portable rocket launchers. The notion those Paratroopers were killing masses of allied armor with their hand held AT weapons is ridiculous, but that is propaganda for you.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
Other sources put the percentage of allied tanks destroyed by handheld AT weapons much higher. Remember that it was not just panzerfausts and panzerschrecks being used. There is a whole other array of weaponry used by German infantry to destroy tanks e.g. magnetic mines, recoiless rifles etc
Also there is lots of evidence and personal testimonies from allied tankers who claim the German tank hunter teams took a heavy toal on allied armor, coupled with the fact that most German handheld AT
fallschirmjager0000 2 years ago
Yep like the Goliat... The driving mine...
M55q 2 years ago
weapons were in abundance (namely the panzerfaust) and were easy to operate and excelled in the bocage terrain of Normandy. I wouldnt say it is ridiculous that German Paras destroyed masses of allied tanks. Afterall the Fallschirmjaeger excelled in close quarters combat and were trained on how to deal with enemy armour at close quarters which is what they were doing in the Norman bocage.
fallschirmjager0000 2 years ago
True but all those weapons tended to be High Explosive Anti-Tank devices. The 8% figure is including all forms of rocket projectiles as well as most types of mines used that were not buried. The German paras were no doubt well trained and capable of inflicting high losses on armor in such close country but its quite obvious it was other weapons such as tanks and Anti-tank guns (combined 70% of losses) and even mines (accounted for 15% of all losses) that were hurting allied armor the most.
Mcplkelly 2 years ago
what rifle does the one paratrooper carry at 1:14/1:15, looks like an m1carbine to me?
AndyFJK 2 years ago
I'm kinda guessing it looks like a carbine. If thats true it might be a Gewehr 43 but I'm guessing
kingtiger88 2 years ago
no not a Gewehr 43, the m1 I think too
het88zer 2 years ago
The Tiger was a good tank but a bad idea. The Sherman was easy to build and maintain and there were a lot of them. The tiger was hard to build and maintain and not many got built.
lutherheggs 2 years ago
This is a propaganda film. Many of those scenes were staged.
CaptC4t 2 years ago
can't say it wasn't realistic shermans are well known for their poor armor and well the Germans had some of the best AT infantry weapons
LastRussianEmporer 2 years ago
go on you "cutters" i mean germans kick there ass
BritishWarLord 2 years ago
So German propoganda wasnt?
USEH567 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
German propoganda in WW2 = bullshit
USEH567 3 years ago
all war propaganda is the same bullshit, with better or worse production. It's just a massive weapon for the home front.
exeklopman 3 years ago 4
The germans were the best anti-tank infantry soldiers of any side during WW2. I believe this is largely due to necessity and having to face Russian T-34 tanks which were overall very sound.
Panzerschrek1945 3 years ago 5
The Germans had the best shoulder fired anti tank weapons of the war. When Allied troops came across caches of Panzerfausts, they would readily use them.
Elchupucabra 3 years ago 6
The Russians also possessed fine anti-tank infantry. They were the ones who developed many of the anti-tank tactics used for most of the war. The Germans had first hand knowledge of these tactics after facing and adopting them on the eastern front, and used them to devastating effect on allied armour in the west.
calicheSCOT 3 years ago
He means "ambush" ;)
castel2006aug 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
" Mein Fuhrer, americans comming...we are totally fucked, please pass the cyanide pills, Danke". Dr Goebbels, 1945
astartelucifer 3 years ago
What does Amush mean in English?
bobhansenobc 3 years ago
I loved Svaing Pvt.Ryan.However, barley mentioned the Biritsh even being there. Typical American style. But showed only one side. Maybe a Das Boot style movie can be produced someday.
kingtiger88 3 years ago
Yeah but 90% of US WWII movies suck. We hadn't made a good one since Patton. Give us a break.
cleverandruthless 2 years ago
saving private ryan?
ilovelowez 2 years ago
Yes. Saving Private Ryan was a very good movie, with great performances, deadly accurate stage design, and epic scope. As for telling two or more sides, directors have tried that in war movies (We Were Soldiers, plus Thin Red Line had mutiple perspectives), and it really makes the movies feel crammed. Just one side of Normandy is a long story to tell.
cleverandruthless 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hitler was a fucking disaster for Europe !! were in the mess we are now in !! because of HIM!! i hate him for the last European ciliv war that took so much out off us !! lets for get him!!
felixzs 3 years ago
yes, your right, he was a monster, and the biggest of all! but to forget him means, to forget all, who fights agenst him! If you forget the past, you will do the same misstakes agen!
(sorry for my shit english, i`m german)
rhyno2222 3 years ago
Yeah...you are right. He was a monster. But in the 30's he managed to have a nation that had work, food, water and people had jobs...and they loved him for it. Can we say that about our leaders today? No.
He was smart in that way...but what he actually did to the Jewish and others alike, that was wrong on many levels.
The German army was well trained and fought hard with good tanks and equipment, but it shows in the end that a small nation cannot fight on 2 or more fronts. My 2 pennies.
dougeagle 3 years ago
well if japanese attacked russians and american's then they would all be fighting two front wars
Naerbu 3 years ago
and why was the Monte Cassino and Dresden thing a stupid statement.Oh lemme get it if the Germans did it first its ok to bomb monastery's with zero military value and helpless civilians ah.. ok :P."Your boys" as you call them were perfect.. the germans were evil i get the point.. end of story
tanasexu 3 years ago
mit dem typ auf 0:23 war sicher net zu spassen xd
KevinBasinger 3 years ago
well...around 1:45 u can see some cromwell tanks
redspike000 3 years ago
Interesting video. In response to some of the comments here, the Fallschirmjager veterans typically had the cutoff stahlhelm, whereas newer troopers recieved either the cutoff or the standard m1934 stahlhelm depending on availability. However it does seem to be a mixed set of films, certainly there are a few discrepencies in the way it's cut here and there i.e the cromwells but I'm not sure that there are SS troops, there wasn't really a standard camo scheme any more by late 43. (availability)
Karelwolfpup 3 years ago
yup famous identified footage of 12 ss panzer grenadiers 28 secs in!! one of the troopers to the viewers left wearing Italian camo!!
felixzs 3 years ago
ah yes, you have good eyes junge. Hadn't spotted that before so, yes, there are SS troops in the video. The Italian come is a little surprising, but not wholly so. After all, you used what you had from 43 onwards. I've seen photos and film of guys with a mix of several different periods of uniform and camo, never mind weapons.
Karelwolfpup 3 years ago
yup !! credited in 12 th ss in bilt (veterans of the division journal, from memory think they name the troopers) , but soz not the trooper to the left , the other guy !! he has dark Italian camo trousers !! stolen from Italian stocks while the division had its shake down in Northern Italy just prior to committal on the invasion front ...
felixzs 3 years ago
actually, when I looked at the video I did wonder what you meant by "trooper to the viewers left" when, as you say, the guy on the right had the Italian trousers. Still, it's fascinating to see these sorts of films.
Karelwolfpup 3 years ago