@djmarkski2000 yes, and ALL the eastern countries Polland,Ukraine,Bulgaria,Greece,Lithuania,Lethonia,Estonia etc. would've been moved in western siberia lol, leaving the wealthy grounds to the nazi
nope, a bit more then that. the last record that the Russian had on how meny T-34'sthey made was 84. 634. and that includes the 1946 model as well. and not those wich were build buy other countries under license, such as China.
@petunized you show immaturity by resorting of name calling right off the bat. In any case you have demonstrated that you don't deserve to be treated with respect. German tanks were crappy just because they could not be deployed in overwhelming numbers? I think not. why don't you go join a gang that would welcome a loser like yourself since they need numbers to feel powerful?
@djsatane do your research.... the battle of Kursk was decided by clever stragedy on the russians part......when the decisive tank battle was being fought at Prokhrovka, the russians staged two huge attacks on the mius river sector, timed to draw the german armour away from the Kursk operation.
@ryanlyc yes, that's what seemed to happen in "Saving Private Ryan" when Tom Hanks character shot a tank but it was actually a plane that did that, lol.
T34 may be great, but when 15 attacks an german line, two lone Ferdinans move up to support, take out 8-10 of them, send them running off.. And lets only one get away. Then you know its not really the best ;)
You should get yourself better informed, the red army did not destroy 80% of the Wehrmacht at the end of the war, let alone even before operation Overlord.
@Dreachon he may be right, maybe not before D-Day, but in 1944 alone over a million germans died in eastern front, in fact in operation bagration alone something like 300,000 germans were lost in belarus. i can think of several offensives were germany had casualties in the 6 digit number. the germans did not suffer casualties like this anywhere else, only in russia did they suffer like this.
He is not right, 80% of the total wehrmacht is a nubmer made up by the soviets to make themselves look great.
Yes the germsn did suffer the majority of their losses on the eastern front and tehre is no doubt about this but 80% of the total is a figment of imagination and propaganda.
The soviets loved to inflate the german losses, best examples of this is Kursk and Prokhorovka.
And that is nothing more than soviet propaganda, the russians did destroy the majority but claiming they did 80 to 90% of the werhmacht full strenght is nonsense.
Especially as after mid 1942 there no longer was 80% stationed on the eastern front, it had already dropepd to 75% and it would continue to drop throughout the war.
@janakag And yet Americans have convinced themselves they were the dominating force of world war 2, irrespective of how much the British and Russian armies influenced the tide of war.
@RetardPwnage I am american and that is untrue. I know a lot of people who are also american and think the same. I've seen a lot of immature people on youtube. And yeah, the Americans kids are a fricken nuisance. But please don't generalize us all. I've seen a lot of people from various places write stupid things.
@blackhawk438 -- correct... I don't know anyone who believes the Eastern Front wasn't a bloody meat grinder.... hell even Hogans Heros made references to the Eastern Front.
@janakag agreed D-day would have been possible but not without the British who used there spies to trick the German forces into thinking the attack was happening somewhere else. D-day would have been impossible if it weren't for British spies and it would have been delayed if it weren't for the Russians. The britsh role in the war is always disrespected.
If the Russians stayed allies with Germany and never got attacked Germany the Germans might have taken over britian.
@vibers9 Heimlich Himmler,Rudolf Hess,Joseph Goebbels,Herman Goring,Ernst Rohm all members of Hitlers inner circle and fanatical Nazi's with the same ideologies as Hitler........no parkinsons disease amongst them!
@isukaman the Soviet Union during that time had the largest oil, coal and gas production in the World. That is one major reason why Hitler invaded it. Plus, the Western Allies send in Military supplies also to help. That supplies included fuel :)
Tiger was one of the most propagandized tank during WW2,it has weight over 60tones combat ready.It only has a weak 700hp engine.It was to complex to fix it on battlefield,it had lot of logistic problems,speed,mobility and relaibility were catastrophal.The Tiger was often used as propaganda to scare the allies as kind invincible tank(psychologicalweapon),sometimes germans belived tiger propaganda and played Battleship with Tiger against Infantry and other Tanks that was disillusioning for nazis.
@Talshet Well if you put aside all the reliability problems and when the tank functioned properly it was almost unrivaled with its super thick armor and the 88mm gun could go through almost any armor that the Allies had.
The Russians overwhelmed the Germans with their good tank designs built in huge numbers, although 10% of Red army tanks used in this battle were US supplied Shermans. German tanks were powerful machines but to complicated and difficult to build. The Panther with modern ball bearings would probably have lasted 30+ years in a peace time army. The T34 using simple brass bushes would only have lasted a few years. But this didn't matter as the average life span of a WW2 tank was 12 weeks
German tanks were superior in almost every way then soviet or allied tanks. The only problem was that Germany was very outnumbered and could not produce so many tanks as soviets or allies could. Tiger tanks could fight off 4 shermans or T-34. They had some technical problems but still, in combat they were the best tanks.
t-34 and tiger wasnt the same... better compare js-2 with tiger.. germans had wellarmored vehickles with nice 88mm cannon but they had troubles with engines (soviet tanks had a diesel instead of carburettor crap). Tigers was too heavy for their engines and was twice expensive
I do believe that the Germans had the best tanks during WWII and even a few years after that. However, German production could not match that of Russian or Americans. Eventually quantity triumphed over quality.
@djmarkski2000 The Germans had tanks with good armor, but it does not mean better. They drove slowly by Soviet and American and they were harder to manage.
@Talshet except for the Vietnam War...Nah just kidding, the Vietname war was won because it was a defensive war. The US lose because the brave US Military were trick into fighting not an unwinnable war, but were fighting a war of lies. It was like the American War of Independence, the Viet Congs were the American Rebels and the US GI's were the British colonials.
@djmarkski2000 They tried to make tanks that were a little too cutting edge. The Panthers had spontaneous engine fires. Tigers had reliability issues. They worked them out but it took time and resources.
Trouble with the tiger atlest was really the fact that it was hard to maintain, yet alone replace! but when an Sherman or T34 broke down you could just leave it and get a new one :3 send in the engineers and recover it => repair while the crew had a new tank!
@djmarkski2000 Agreed. The M1 Abrams is clearly based off of the Leopard 2A5 that the germans are using since America signed a contract with the germans to design tanks together. IMO, the germans still make the best tanks out there ;D
@djmarkski2000 only a fool or a kid can say something like that. if a tank is so hard to produce, that you can't field em in numbers, its a crappy tank. And thats what german tanks were all about. Super duper toys for hitler, rather than a true victory machines.
@djmarkski2000: Nah, the T-34 was a great tank when it was well maintained. 85mm main cannon, 30kph+ top speed, and enough frontal armour to stop anything short of an 88mm gun.
@NobleKorhedron lol T-34-76 was the best tank back in 39'. it had 56kph top speed:P 45mm sloped (90mm+ effective armor). it is the best tank because of its simplicity,not by any means because of its performance.
@1980friend Are you on drugs? The German battle tanks became better than almost anything else on the battlefield. Ask any honest Allied Tanker whether he felt superior to the German tanks before the Pershing came on the scene.
Well,I'm from Egypt and I would say that Germany is a great nation but if it weren't for Hitler's stupidity and despotism that made Germany got involved in wars on almost all fronts and broke the truce with the Russians besides got shackled with relatively weak nations in Europe,I would say things would have changed !
@0puest0 what an idiot and uneducated person u are ... german tanks are crap ? sorry bro , learn the fact of the kursk plz ... most of german tanks on kurks front were killed or disabled by mines ... like half of em . meanwhile other 3 were killed by AT's and artilleries ... so 2 vs 10 of your russian's craps still can't fight for shit ..
653rd Heavy Tank Destroyer Battalion had 13 ferdinand and killed more than 320 of your russians shit ... for 13 lost traded for 320 ...
AND WE ALL KNOW THAT THE NUMBER IS HIGHER , COZ COMMIE LIEKS YOU ALWAYS HIDE THE FACT AND TRUTH ...
YES , WE LOST THE WAR , BUT YOUR ACT OF SAYING OUR TANKS ARE CRAP ARE JUST STUPID AND LACK OF INTELLIGENT . People like you who ruins the world and all facts along with it
@ADOLFHITLER2010 Theres no doubt that the German Tanks,and especially the Tiger was superior, allthough quantity won over quality,the german tanks were top of the line.
During the invasion of france the germans faced a superior french force, the french tanks had better armor and stroger engines wich made them faster and more ressilliant.
BUT...the germans had their radios, wich resultet in a "1step ahead" advantage for the germans as they was able to interact in a way that the french couldnt.
@ADOLFHITLER2010 ,bullshit. You can't know exact numbers, they weren't that big. Or you believe thet being on another continent means you know better?
@0puest0 The only reason why German tanks looked like crap was because of the Panzer IV, it was developed in 1937, well Soviet and American tanks were developed in 1940-50.
And please, the German tanks are awesome... They just have poor commanders so before you act all patriotic please do your research.
The KVs is so old !, who u can say that ?, the T-34=KV in performance, this is the reason why not build more, the KV stop the 6º panzer division for 2 day "Alone". (just 1 tank to all nazis)
The IS ?, mmm... maybe the IS-3 or IS-7, cuz the IS and IS-2 is old versions and useless whe the nazis can build a tank.
Hitler is so stupid, builiding "big" tanks with high rear slow and useless tanks for blizkrieg.
@0puest0 Umm, they were great tanks. They only lost due to sheer numbers. The T34/76 had a shit low velocity gun that had no hope of penning a Tiger even in the side hardly. That sloped armor..it was only good against the Panzer II's IIIs and IVD's, the ones with the short 75mm KwK37. Once the long barreled 75mm and 88mm guns came in, so much for that 'superior' armor eh? The engines and overall reliability of the Russian tanks was terrible and they, atleast early, didnt have radios
@0puest0 THE RUSSIANS HAD BETTER TECHNOLOGY THAN THE NAZI'S? YOU GOTTA BE SHITTING ME!
if Russia had more tech than the Germans did,i don't understand why 10,000 Germans could kill 30,000 Russians.
RUSSIA SHOULD BE ASHAMED HERSELF! when the Russians besieged Berlin, 10,000 SS soldiers were left against 30,000+ Russians,and the SS killed them, and the SS were fundamentally defeated and yet they kicked more ass than the allies combined.
@dickran2142battle Большие потери у Русских - это виновато командование . Высшее руководство не берегло жизни своих бойцов . Выполнить любой ценой , быстрее , быстрее . Дело не в технологиях . Дело в преступной глупости и бесчеловечности руководства .
@0puest0 Never said that German machinery was better than Russian...but I do not agree with your POV that German tanks sucked...after all, the Wehrmacht and the Red Army were the two deadliest armies of WW2...while Russian engineering was far more efficient regarding mass production and better suited for winter warfare, German technology relied on sophisticated design and superior firepower...in this context, both armies deserve our full respect.
@0puest0 German tanks are clearly not crap, the Panther outclasses any Soviet tank. The Russian tanks were more balanced and easier to produce in mass numbers, but tank to tank most German heavy tanks outclass the Russian ones.
Well, the Germans also had training to do monstrous things with the Jews, Soviet prisoners, Roma, Turks, Arabs, and so on. Friend the Nazis miserable trained to hell with Satan and were
Lots of miscalculations in this doc, germans had 0.7 million men, russians had almost 2 million, germans had 3000 tanks and russians had little more than 5000, germans had 10000 guns, russians 25000, germans had 2510 aircraft and russians had almost 3000. But the russian number advantage wasnt so "advantageous" when put against the german soldiers experience and training.
Germany didnt lose my friends, it was america that forced germany to divide its resources between two fronts that caused german retreat in Russia. In the northern part of kursk, the german forces were halted, but due to german attack beginning one hour bf4 planned in the south, the russians were getting pounded and were almost at the brink of defeat when hitler took out some of germanys main tank divisions and sent them to italy and france.
@asadparvez2 Fearing loss of Italy, Hitler warned FM Manstein on 13th July that WSS formations might have to leave Kursk, but FM M misleads us when he says success was snatched from him by Hitler's decision to break off Citadel: contemporary records make it clear that the offensive was not broken off (and no final decision taken to remove WSS) until 25th July, by which time it was certain Citadel had failed and that Soviet counter strokes to the rear of German attack areas had begun
@asadparvez2 I agree what you say about Hoth's decision to attack early, because the 'Lucy' spy ring only operated effectively at Fuhrer HQ level and had no way of leaking to the Soviets any moves that German field commanders planned and implemented themselves on their own initiative. Incidentally, this incident is probably a last example of Hitler allowing his commanders in the field any sort of meaningful autonomy not only at a strategic, but at quite a low operational level :-)
@asadparvez2 Yes: maybe so: but, although I take no acception what-so-ever to your comment, it is simply an indication of a retrospective political disposition, rather than analysis of alternative or actual past events :-)
@otester Yes: even the Ferdinand assault gun broke through Soviet lines on the first day and took a terrible toll of their armour before it became less effective due to mechanical breakdown, and also because Red Army infantrymen discovered it had no machine guns and was therefore vulnerable to their magnetic mines attached to the sides of the hull or casemate :-)
The British ultra code breakers had warned Ivan about the attack on Kursk months before, we even told them the start time so Ivan could pound the start lines of the Germans for an hour! Thats never mentioned though. Russias man power wearing down Germanys best divisions and the British code breakers defeated Germany!
@chainedtoaradiator Nope: it was the 'Lucy' spy ring, not 'Ultra': also, the Soviet pre-emptive bombardment was far less effective on the southern 'Citadel' pincer because Col Gen Hoth made the decision on his own initiative to begin his attack earlier than originally planned :-)
You don't seem to know much about Russian WW2 technology and doctrines, do you?
In 41 Russians had much more advanced tanks (t34, KV1), by the end of war - matcing quality (IS, ISU) with much lower price. Only in 43, when mass Tigers\Panthers were met in Kursk, germans had an edge.
@1alexisneverlate1 In 41 most Soviet tank formations consisted of obsolescent BT7's: the T34 and KV1 were only just appearing in significant numbers: Moreover, prior to hugely increased lend lease deliveries in 44, they had on average only 1 radio for every 20 vehicles. On the other hand, German command and control communication was, and continued to be, excellent. Also, a Tiger's 88mm L71 cannon could knock out even a T34/85 at distances well beyond its accurate firing range.
What you're saying is certainly true, although i somehow miss the point.
In 41 - most of 20 000 soviet tanks were outdated - but matched the 3000 pz2, and pz3 counterparts. 2000 of 20 0000 were t34 and Kv, with all their problems - were unmatched.
t3485 - as precicely written, being far inferior to tiger\panther etc, had uncomparible production values, and was very effective as a weapon against much more advanced and superior (in price) tanks. +Tanks are not created to fight tanks.
@1alexisneverlate1 Sorry if I wasn't clear: another example is that in the opening stages of 'Barbarossa' six soviet mechanized tanks corps (consisting in large part of the advanced T34 / KV1 machines you mentioned) attacked en mass in a pincer movement against PZ Grp 1 at Dubno: although the Soviets inflicted heavy losses they were outmaneuvred mainly due to a paucity of effective radio communication: the Germans emerged capable of further offensive action the Soviets did not
Organisation structure of German army was, indeed, unmatched. Not only due to the lack of radio, but the education level etc. etc. etc. What i was mostly trying to say, is that the soviet technological doctrine (which has its backgrounds of course), turned out to be more effective than the german one - in the end. (which had its background as well) and the t34 is merely a symbol of this doctrine.
The battle was compromised by Intelligence services. Russians were informed by an English spy (Ultra decoded) & constructed deep defences of 200km. Nazis had lack in intelligence. Manstein suggested Hitler to attack on May before Russian preparations. Hitler wanted to wait Tigers and Panthers till July & prevaled delaying. Hitler was a military idiot, better this way, & excpelled many of his maggior Generals, while Stalin did not since 1942 and on. They should have made peace & rescue lives...
@rommelervin Soviets were informed by 'Lucy' spy ring not British 'Ultra' decoders. Also, the blame for Zitadelle's failure is not entirely Hitler's: OKW staff (even field commanders like Model) were well aware of RA build up, but postponed thinking these would be destroyed confident that their new weapons would break through. Hitler was hardly "a military idiot", but he became increasingly divorced from reality and unwilling even to listen to opinions which disagreed with his own.
@elrjames777@elrjames777 Maybe you are % more right about Lucy. But still is a debate about the source of the Lucy ring. It is clamed the source was Ultra. I had this in mind while writing. The failure of Zitadelle is not entirely Hitler's, but his was the one to give the orders which eventually would prevale above any other view of matters. That he was an IDIOT it is my personal opinion. Not only by a military view, in which his exceeded but in many other sectors. Good evening.
@rommelervin The only debate is on 'Wikikpedia' which is not exactly the best historical authority on the topic. In reality, the Lucy information to the Soviets came directly from OKW headquarters via Switzerland and not from Enigma messages decoded by 'Ultra' at Bletchley Park. Evidence for this is that following the 20th July 44 bomb plot, Gen Fellgieble (head of communications) and Hans Oster (Chief of Staff military intelligence) were arrested and the flow of information ceased.
@elrjames777 Yes the only debate is there on the net, since In a history Periodic Illusttation I posses concerning the Kursk Battle, it was clearly stated that the information flow came from ultra and throught some spy. The bibliography of that illustration is vast. So I do not know the original source of this info.
Is the proof you put on the table an unshackable one? Cause after a plot security misures are up. Proof? There wasn't any more plots...
@rommelervin What is the "periodic illustration" you possess that informs us 'Lucy' warnings to Soviets about 'Citadel' came from 'Ultra' decodes and not directly from OKW via Switzerland: it wouldn't be unsourced speculators weekly by any chance would it :-) Statements like "vast bibliography" are nebulous, meaningless and unhelpful; one authoritative source will do which, by your own admission, you "do not know". Try: VE Tarrant 'Red Orchestra' or memoirs of Gen Reinhard Gehlen
@elrjames777 Do be so sure. I stated VAST in confrontation of what Youtube aloud me to post. Sources of illustration, I mention only writers, no space for books: Eddy Beyer, MArtin Caidin, Alan Clark, Robin Cross, Phil GrasbySiegfried Knappe, Sir Basil Hart, Bryan Perret, Robin Lumsden, Gordon Williamson, Georgi K. Zhukov plus some w w w sites. Here is a reference for british Lucy and enigma "h t t p : // atethepaint . blogspot . com / 2010 / 05 / battle-of-kursk_19 . html"
@superhornet69 Ever heard about foreigners in the NW Pacific where you live?
I can speak and write 4 modern languages + 1 ancient.
That explains some of my mistakes in your language.
If the definition of retard or moron is not knowing a foreign launguage 100%, then don't check out your own shoes...cause you might caught up in an astonishing surprise for your arrogance.
@superhornet6 Probably not moronic: more likely the familiar over politicized and stubborn viewpoint of the east European of ex communist background :-)
@rommelervin None on this list of yours, which purport to be the sources of your unsubstantiated assertion, adduce any direct evidence that the Lucy spy ring was subordinated to, an integral part of, or in any way connected to the allied 'Ultra' code breaking operations. The fact is that information the Soviets received about a forthcoming offensive against their Kursk salient did not come from decoded intercepts of German 'Enigma' messages at Bletchley Park :-)
@elrjames777 In this illustration there is a name stated for this british spy who feeded russians from enigma along with this "Lucy ring" but it is not written in english, so I do not know excaclty the name. Should be "Alexander Foot"? Really dont know which book of all is the source of this name. Sorry.
@rommelervin Had Hitler (both as supreme commander of the German armed forces and army commander in chief) had strong "views of the matter" then they certainly would have "prevailed". The reality is, however, that he merely chose from the conflicting options about 'Citadel' pressed upon him either by his HQ staff or commanders in the field: Zeitzler conceived the idea, Guderian warned of a potential "death ride": Model wanted to delay the operation, Manstein urged an attack at once.
@elrjames777 Yes, as you say. HE MADE his choise [he was in charge], as always, even if he was unsure about the attack. He was unsure even for the war at this point but realizing it, was meaning realizing his own end. That is why he kept on pushing. That is why I consider him an idiot. Destryed German nation and other people just to keep his ass alife.
@rommelervin Perhaps the "other sectors" you had in mind were the deflection of valuable manpower and communication resources away from Army use in pursuit of racial and gender policies which could only harm the war effort: German women were restricted from working in industry and certain races and nationalities were not only precluded from voluntarily assisting the Reich, but actually persecuted by it; from a purely military standpoint this probably can be considered as idiotic :-)
@2:57 absolutely! no tank was better then the t-34.........well exsept (takes deep breath) the tiger,panther,m26 pershing,sherman firefly and not to mention the king tiger!
T34 was made in 1939 - introduced a perfect balance between mobility, armor, firepower and production values. (like 20 t34 cost like 1 tiger and takes 10 times faster to build). It was a "soldier tank", backbone of war.
All others you mention, might be better in some aspects, but with all those characteristics combined - far behind. And are all created years later and had their advanced matches in their time, as t3485, IS2 etc.
@PhilosopherGaming your wrong! heinz guderian was preparing a panzer army that he said would be ready for a major offencive in 1944 on the eastern front, but as usual Hitler interviened and launched an attack at kusk.Therefore guderians re-arming was wasted.
@coolkid123456100 Guderian had, de facto, his own private army equivalent to Himmler's WSS or Goering's LFD's, but why Hitler separated command of motorized troops from the rest of the Army is hard to say: Guderian was elevated to a position no less important than Hitler's chiefs of staff (Jodl + Zeitzler) with whom he should have worked in co-operation: in fact, each of them disliked the others: no other combat nation offered so diverse a command organization for ground troops
this battle would not have happened in the hands of a skilled commander although a skilled commander would not have attacked russia in the first place
By early 1943 Hitler had long-then taken over a self-appointed role as hands-on master tactician of Germany's land war in Russia & had already sacked the best of Germany's Barbarossa Generals, including the incomparable Guderian. Hitler, the amateur fool, by then was the best thing the Allies had going for them. The German Brass vetoed this disastrous battle .. Hitler stupidly overuled them. Had the German Army NOT conducted this battle .. who knows how the Russian Front may have turned out.
@colindominy to be honest I dont think it would have changed the conclusion of the russian front if kursk had never taken place, the german thrust had stalled and so many cock ups had been made before then that i doubt germany could ever have regained the momentum, though i guess with those lost tanks they could at least have held on a while longer or made the russiam advance more difficult
@colindominy While it is true that Hitler had "taken over" the post of army commander in chief in addition to the office of commander in chief of the German armed forces, the "German brass", as you call them, were far from united in their opinion: it was Zietzler's idea but Guderian opposed it, Manstein wished an immediate attack but Model wanted to delay: Hitler merely chose from the options forced upon him by his own staff and field commanders: he chose badly rather than foolishly
why isn't that ss officer at the end of a noose??
mobstamaniac 4 hours ago
I wonder how china would survive if Hitler passed through russia
and invaded china like to see that as much as i dont
you know what i mean right
kingtiger009 1 day ago
@kingtiger009 If Russia had fallen, Germany would have been rather unstoppable.
djmarkski2000 9 hours ago
@djmarkski2000 yes, and ALL the eastern countries Polland,Ukraine,Bulgaria,Greece,Lithuania,Lethonia,Estonia etc. would've been moved in western siberia lol, leaving the wealthy grounds to the nazi
vibers9 1 hour ago
@petunized they produced 60,000 T34s...
sherman630 1 week ago
@sherman630
nope, a bit more then that. the last record that the Russian had on how meny T-34'sthey made was 84. 634. and that includes the 1946 model as well. and not those wich were build buy other countries under license, such as China.
ThePanzerWarMachine 1 week ago
@petunized you show immaturity by resorting of name calling right off the bat. In any case you have demonstrated that you don't deserve to be treated with respect. German tanks were crappy just because they could not be deployed in overwhelming numbers? I think not. why don't you go join a gang that would welcome a loser like yourself since they need numbers to feel powerful?
djmarkski2000 1 week ago 7
@BigKahunaz888 it was voted to be the best begause of the mass noumbers what was produced, But 90% of the produced T34s were destroyed
sherman630 1 week ago
@sherman630 As well as 90% of produced tigers
petunized 1 week ago
Crap sound. I cant listen to it now, maybe later.
mikaelsten1 1 week ago
the t34 is extremely ugly but powerful
MrHeyobitch 1 week ago
@MrHeyobitch T34 is what a tank SHOULD look like!
TalonMercenary 1 day ago
THe T34 was superior to the German or American Sherman tanks This ttank was voted to be the best tank in WWII.
BigKahunaz888 1 week ago
youtube.com/watch?v=-xJw0ggaTKM
Great documentary about Kursk battle
aMIGo677 1 week ago
wow Tiger SS looks awesome :D
qusaisaher 3 weeks ago
tank war porno ?
gasdorf 3 weeks ago
outcome of this battle was sadly not decided by tanks but by artillery and air support, otherwise germans would have won.
djsatane 3 weeks ago
@djsatane do your research.... the battle of Kursk was decided by clever stragedy on the russians part......when the decisive tank battle was being fought at Prokhrovka, the russians staged two huge attacks on the mius river sector, timed to draw the german armour away from the Kursk operation.
missmoo691 1 week ago
lol,I use pistol to destroy a tank.
ryanlyc 4 weeks ago
@ryanlyc yes, that's what seemed to happen in "Saving Private Ryan" when Tom Hanks character shot a tank but it was actually a plane that did that, lol.
djmarkski2000 3 weeks ago
T34 may be great, but when 15 attacks an german line, two lone Ferdinans move up to support, take out 8-10 of them, send them running off.. And lets only one get away. Then you know its not really the best ;)
grahwo 4 weeks ago
Can ya imagine the friendly fire incidents in this battle.
MIKCURIE 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@djmarkski2000 "German production could not match that of Russian or Americans."
correction not "or" but "and"
Russia and America and Britain and ...
if it was one on one on Russia that would be a different story but still I'm glad Hitler's ass got owned.
tops1028 1 month ago
Made using World of tanks, lol
MrAsifkhanniaziofpak 1 month ago
Quantity has a quality all its own.....
FlatulousMaximus 1 month ago
If theres no panzer war machine i would be bored now :)
wiibigfanguy 1 month ago 8
@wiibigfanguy
glad i could help you getting rid off boredness =)
ThePanzerWarMachine 1 month ago 8
@ThePanzerWarMachine Sometimes you're even better than 9gag at keeping me awake :))
RenerDeCastro 1 month ago
@ThePanzerWarMachine hahah YOU HAVENT JUST HELPED GET RID OF IT U DESTROYED IT :) seriously all the doc's are great
NormDesignIRE 2 days ago
The Germans could have really used a four engine bomber in this battle.
RPenta 1 month ago
Thank God for the Red Army. They saved so many American and British lives by destroying 80% of the German Army before D-Day.
janakag 1 month ago 15
@janakag Yeah, hooray to them for bringing communism to Europe
Nered88 1 month ago
@Nered88 lol
djmarkski2000 1 month ago
@janakag
You should get yourself better informed, the red army did not destroy 80% of the Wehrmacht at the end of the war, let alone even before operation Overlord.
Dreachon 1 month ago
@Dreachon he may be right, maybe not before D-Day, but in 1944 alone over a million germans died in eastern front, in fact in operation bagration alone something like 300,000 germans were lost in belarus. i can think of several offensives were germany had casualties in the 6 digit number. the germans did not suffer casualties like this anywhere else, only in russia did they suffer like this.
bombarderoazul 1 month ago
@bombarderoazul
He is not right, 80% of the total wehrmacht is a nubmer made up by the soviets to make themselves look great.
Yes the germsn did suffer the majority of their losses on the eastern front and tehre is no doubt about this but 80% of the total is a figment of imagination and propaganda.
The soviets loved to inflate the german losses, best examples of this is Kursk and Prokhorovka.
Dreachon 4 weeks ago
@Dreachon
actually Ziemke, not Soviets
and it was 88% ,according to the same source
1cspr1 1 week ago
@1cspr1
And that is nothing more than soviet propaganda, the russians did destroy the majority but claiming they did 80 to 90% of the werhmacht full strenght is nonsense.
Especially as after mid 1942 there no longer was 80% stationed on the eastern front, it had already dropepd to 75% and it would continue to drop throughout the war.
Dreachon 1 week ago
@Dreachon
around 63% stationed in the East, actually.
And no, its not propaganda, its research by Earl Ziemke, numbers he provided are based on captured German documents.
What you fail to understand is that there is no correlation between number of troops stationed in a given geographical area and casualties sustained
1cspr1 1 week ago
@1cspr1
Actually there is a connection.
Dreachon 1 week ago
@Dreachon
However the statistical data does not support that claim. Therefore such connection exists only in your imagination
1cspr1 1 week ago
@janakag And yet Americans have convinced themselves they were the dominating force of world war 2, irrespective of how much the British and Russian armies influenced the tide of war.
RetardPwnage 1 month ago
@RetardPwnage I am american and that is untrue. I know a lot of people who are also american and think the same. I've seen a lot of immature people on youtube. And yeah, the Americans kids are a fricken nuisance. But please don't generalize us all. I've seen a lot of people from various places write stupid things.
blackhawk438 4 weeks ago
@blackhawk438 -- correct... I don't know anyone who believes the Eastern Front wasn't a bloody meat grinder.... hell even Hogans Heros made references to the Eastern Front.
the82spartans 4 weeks ago
@janakag Although you paid a heavy price
blackhawk438 4 weeks ago
@janakag just so they could be demonized later...
boss180888 3 weeks ago
@janakag agreed D-day would have been possible but not without the British who used there spies to trick the German forces into thinking the attack was happening somewhere else. D-day would have been impossible if it weren't for British spies and it would have been delayed if it weren't for the Russians. The britsh role in the war is always disrespected.
If the Russians stayed allies with Germany and never got attacked Germany the Germans might have taken over britian.
lordnocts 2 weeks ago
@janakag Fuck red army barbarians!
valttu94 1 week ago
@janakag Agreed sir. May the heroes of the Red Army rest in peace.
TheRedRussianCossack 1 week ago
@janakag Thank God hitler was an idiot for staging wars on two fronts!
lander4545 6 days ago
@lander4545 Hitler's stupidity was courtesy of his ideology. He didn't see the Russians as human. That sure came back to haunt him
TalonMercenary 1 day ago
@lander4545 he had parkinson and the illness affects your brain so you can't think straight
vibers9 22 hours ago
Comment removed
lander4545 5 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vibers9 Heimlich Himmler,Rudolf Hess,Joseph Goebbels,Herman Goring,Ernst Rohm all members of Hitlers inner circle and fanatical Nazi's with the same ideologies as Hitler........no parkinsons disease amongst them!
lander4545 5 hours ago
@janakag Yeah, but sadly they failed to save millions of thier own lives.
flacon365 5 days ago
mmmm Panzer VI can't be destroyed by one T-34/76 shell...
Listenchump 1 month ago
Where did the Soviets get the fuel for all those tanks?
isukaman 1 month ago
@isukaman the Soviet Union during that time had the largest oil, coal and gas production in the World. That is one major reason why Hitler invaded it. Plus, the Western Allies send in Military supplies also to help. That supplies included fuel :)
nodinitiative 1 month ago
Tiger was one of the most propagandized tank during WW2,it has weight over 60tones combat ready.It only has a weak 700hp engine.It was to complex to fix it on battlefield,it had lot of logistic problems,speed,mobility and relaibility were catastrophal.The Tiger was often used as propaganda to scare the allies as kind invincible tank(psychologicalweapon),sometimes germans belived tiger propaganda and played Battleship with Tiger against Infantry and other Tanks that was disillusioning for nazis.
Talshet 1 month ago
@Talshet Well if you put aside all the reliability problems and when the tank functioned properly it was almost unrivaled with its super thick armor and the 88mm gun could go through almost any armor that the Allies had.
1airplane21 1 month ago
The Russians overwhelmed the Germans with their good tank designs built in huge numbers, although 10% of Red army tanks used in this battle were US supplied Shermans. German tanks were powerful machines but to complicated and difficult to build. The Panther with modern ball bearings would probably have lasted 30+ years in a peace time army. The T34 using simple brass bushes would only have lasted a few years. But this didn't matter as the average life span of a WW2 tank was 12 weeks
binaway 1 month ago
German tanks were superior in almost every way then soviet or allied tanks. The only problem was that Germany was very outnumbered and could not produce so many tanks as soviets or allies could. Tiger tanks could fight off 4 shermans or T-34. They had some technical problems but still, in combat they were the best tanks.
YouNoob755 1 month ago
@YouNoob755
t-34 and tiger wasnt the same... better compare js-2 with tiger.. germans had wellarmored vehickles with nice 88mm cannon but they had troubles with engines (soviet tanks had a diesel instead of carburettor crap). Tigers was too heavy for their engines and was twice expensive
1980friend 1 month ago
I do believe that the Germans had the best tanks during WWII and even a few years after that. However, German production could not match that of Russian or Americans. Eventually quantity triumphed over quality.
djmarkski2000 1 month ago 36
@djmarkski2000 The Germans had tanks with good armor, but it does not mean better. They drove slowly by Soviet and American and they were harder to manage.
fantomdeni95 1 month ago
@djmarkski2000 Quantity will triumph always over quality.Each war showed it.
Talshet 1 month ago
@Talshet except for the Vietnam War...Nah just kidding, the Vietname war was won because it was a defensive war. The US lose because the brave US Military were trick into fighting not an unwinnable war, but were fighting a war of lies. It was like the American War of Independence, the Viet Congs were the American Rebels and the US GI's were the British colonials.
nodinitiative 1 month ago
@djmarkski2000 That, and because the Germans did not have the materials to supply the tanks too. On both sides, fuel and shells were scarce.
XxEntaroAdunxX 1 month ago
@djmarkski2000 They tried to make tanks that were a little too cutting edge. The Panthers had spontaneous engine fires. Tigers had reliability issues. They worked them out but it took time and resources.
colddrake80 4 weeks ago
@colddrake80
Trouble with the tiger atlest was really the fact that it was hard to maintain, yet alone replace! but when an Sherman or T34 broke down you could just leave it and get a new one :3 send in the engineers and recover it => repair while the crew had a new tank!
grahwo 4 weeks ago
@colddrake80 You are right, German tanks weren't without issues However, I still love em.
djmarkski2000 4 weeks ago
@djmarkski2000 Agreed. The M1 Abrams is clearly based off of the Leopard 2A5 that the germans are using since America signed a contract with the germans to design tanks together. IMO, the germans still make the best tanks out there ;D
flacon365 2 weeks ago
@djmarkski2000 only a fool or a kid can say something like that. if a tank is so hard to produce, that you can't field em in numbers, its a crappy tank. And thats what german tanks were all about. Super duper toys for hitler, rather than a true victory machines.
petunized 1 week ago
@djmarkski2000: Nah, the T-34 was a great tank when it was well maintained. 85mm main cannon, 30kph+ top speed, and enough frontal armour to stop anything short of an 88mm gun.
NobleKorhedron 3 days ago
@NobleKorhedron Yes, you are right. Russians did have good tanks. I didn't say that their tanks were bad.
djmarkski2000 3 days ago
@NobleKorhedron lol T-34-76 was the best tank back in 39'. it had 56kph top speed:P 45mm sloped (90mm+ effective armor). it is the best tank because of its simplicity,not by any means because of its performance.
vibers9 22 hours ago
@vibers9 Yes, when Germany launched operation Barbarossa, T34/76 was probably better than anything Germans had at that time.
djmarkski2000 9 hours ago
@djmarkski2000 industrial production capacity was and will always remain Gerry's achilles heel.
HornyDude83 1 day ago
@HornyDude83 well now Germany is 2 or 3 times more powerfull than russia ( regarding gdp and production means)
vibers9 22 hours ago
this battle was the last where german vehicles could compete with soviet vehicles.. after this battle german vehicles became worse and crap
1980friend 1 month ago
@1980friend Are you on drugs? The German battle tanks became better than almost anything else on the battlefield. Ask any honest Allied Tanker whether he felt superior to the German tanks before the Pershing came on the scene.
trinitymike 1 month ago
@trinitymike
wow.. i mean in soviet-german front! of course western allys couldnt compete with german tanks till the end of war
1980friend 1 month ago
Made in Germany vs Made in Russia. I know what I would chose
DenverYellowStone 1 month ago
Can somebody tell me what this documentary is from? Need to list it as a source in an essay!
xPrincessKx 1 month ago
"I am in love with the T-34...it's the best...I LOVE russia"....
(slips note to interviewer...
"please get me the hell outta' russia...i don't want to work in the gulags....save me please")
agriculturaltrading 1 month ago
It seems as though the panzers' turrets are as weak as a sitting duck.
MobiusSpy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Well,I'm from Egypt and I would say that Germany is a great nation but if it weren't for Hitler's stupidity and despotism that made Germany got involved in wars on almost all fronts and broke the truce with the Russians besides got shackled with relatively weak nations in Europe,I would say things would have changed !
Arabova159 2 months ago
Comment removed
Arabova159 2 months ago
Figures are little bit wrong
Germans had 2500 tanks and 770 thousand infantry
Soviets had 3500 tanks and 1300 thousand infantry
Also Red army had reserve called Steppe front, but it used later during Kharkov offensive against army group "Kempf"
SAVSAV1212 2 months ago
@SAVSAV1212 .
Soviets > Germans.
Who won the war ? man. the German tanks are crap !:
0puest0 1 month ago
@0puest0 what an idiot and uneducated person u are ... german tanks are crap ? sorry bro , learn the fact of the kursk plz ... most of german tanks on kurks front were killed or disabled by mines ... like half of em . meanwhile other 3 were killed by AT's and artilleries ... so 2 vs 10 of your russian's craps still can't fight for shit ..
653rd Heavy Tank Destroyer Battalion had 13 ferdinand and killed more than 320 of your russians shit ... for 13 lost traded for 320 ...
ADOLFHITLER2010 1 month ago
@ADOLFHITLER2010 German loses of Kursk : 203,000 casualties
720 tanks and assault guns
681 aircraft
Here's the Russians casualties :
863,303 casualties
6,064 tanks and assault guns
1,626 aircraft
5,244 guns
AND WE ALL KNOW THAT THE NUMBER IS HIGHER , COZ COMMIE LIEKS YOU ALWAYS HIDE THE FACT AND TRUTH ...
YES , WE LOST THE WAR , BUT YOUR ACT OF SAYING OUR TANKS ARE CRAP ARE JUST STUPID AND LACK OF INTELLIGENT . People like you who ruins the world and all facts along with it
ADOLFHITLER2010 1 month ago 3
@ADOLFHITLER2010 That's just not true dude
Anisvit 1 month ago
@ADOLFHITLER2010 You lost tigers they lost n00b tanks
UberVersatile 1 month ago
@ADOLFHITLER2010 Theres no doubt that the German Tanks,and especially the Tiger was superior, allthough quantity won over quality,the german tanks were top of the line.
During the invasion of france the germans faced a superior french force, the french tanks had better armor and stroger engines wich made them faster and more ressilliant.
BUT...the germans had their radios, wich resultet in a "1step ahead" advantage for the germans as they was able to interact in a way that the french couldnt.
Skalmans750 1 month ago
@ADOLFHITLER2010 ,bullshit. You can't know exact numbers, they weren't that big. Or you believe thet being on another continent means you know better?
miraalexander2 1 month ago
@ADOLFHITLER2010 .
Sorry but, IF u are so stupid for not see nothing,i cand did nothing.
this is 2 facts:
1º You are stupid.
2º Germans tanks are crap.
i will not learn you nothing.
0puest0 1 month ago
@0puest0 The only reason why German tanks looked like crap was because of the Panzer IV, it was developed in 1937, well Soviet and American tanks were developed in 1940-50.
And please, the German tanks are awesome... They just have poor commanders so before you act all patriotic please do your research.
SharpAdze 1 month ago
@SharpAdze .
Why you think the german tanks are awesome, do you see the Panther,Tiger,TigerB,Maus,E-50/75/100.
The german tanks are crap :-) thats is a fact, the PanzerIV and the StuG/H are the best tanks for german side.
i dont know why the people say the german tanks are great !!!
0puest0 1 month ago
@0puest0 I don't think you have seen the Panzer XIII E-75, if they ever went into combat that would have ended the Soviets IS's and KVs.
SharpAdze 1 month ago
@SharpAdze .
The KVs is so old !, who u can say that ?, the T-34=KV in performance, this is the reason why not build more, the KV stop the 6º panzer division for 2 day "Alone". (just 1 tank to all nazis)
The IS ?, mmm... maybe the IS-3 or IS-7, cuz the IS and IS-2 is old versions and useless whe the nazis can build a tank.
Hitler is so stupid, builiding "big" tanks with high rear slow and useless tanks for blizkrieg.
Rusia > Usa > Germany
0puest0 1 month ago
@0puest0 Umm, they were great tanks. They only lost due to sheer numbers. The T34/76 had a shit low velocity gun that had no hope of penning a Tiger even in the side hardly. That sloped armor..it was only good against the Panzer II's IIIs and IVD's, the ones with the short 75mm KwK37. Once the long barreled 75mm and 88mm guns came in, so much for that 'superior' armor eh? The engines and overall reliability of the Russian tanks was terrible and they, atleast early, didnt have radios
CMDRFandragon 1 month ago
@CMDRFandragon .
Numbers ?, thats is stupid, how many IS has been destroyer ?, no one !, is a humillation a T-34 kill a Tiger
Hitler could not afford to build large numbers of tanks, so
their tanks had to be invincible thing every army could do, Stalin
had a large staff, and having better technology than the Nazis, made tanks
very cheap (very cheap) and higher performance than the PanzerIV,
Tiger kills so much so that even a simple T-34-85, left out of combat
3 Kingtiger.
Russia> USA> Germany
0puest0 1 month ago
@0puest0 THE RUSSIANS HAD BETTER TECHNOLOGY THAN THE NAZI'S? YOU GOTTA BE SHITTING ME!
if Russia had more tech than the Germans did,i don't understand why 10,000 Germans could kill 30,000 Russians.
RUSSIA SHOULD BE ASHAMED HERSELF! when the Russians besieged Berlin, 10,000 SS soldiers were left against 30,000+ Russians,and the SS killed them, and the SS were fundamentally defeated and yet they kicked more ass than the allies combined.
NAZI'S=SUPREME TECH
dickran2142battle 1 month ago
@dickran2142battle Большие потери у Русских - это виновато командование . Высшее руководство не берегло жизни своих бойцов . Выполнить любой ценой , быстрее , быстрее . Дело не в технологиях . Дело в преступной глупости и бесчеловечности руководства .
Sputniknet1 1 month ago
@0puest0 Your opinion on German machinery is in the minority by a long long way dude
ArenaOfTheAncients 1 month ago
@ArenaOfTheAncients .
Ok, tellme, WHY you think the German machinery is better that russian ?
0puest0 1 month ago
@0puest0 Never said that German machinery was better than Russian...but I do not agree with your POV that German tanks sucked...after all, the Wehrmacht and the Red Army were the two deadliest armies of WW2...while Russian engineering was far more efficient regarding mass production and better suited for winter warfare, German technology relied on sophisticated design and superior firepower...in this context, both armies deserve our full respect.
ArenaOfTheAncients 1 month ago
@0puest0 German tanks are clearly not crap, the Panther outclasses any Soviet tank. The Russian tanks were more balanced and easier to produce in mass numbers, but tank to tank most German heavy tanks outclass the Russian ones.
XXXpallisterXXX 1 month ago
@ADOLFHITLER2010
In other words, the Russians only beat you because they cheated????? You should have called the referee and put Stalin in the penalty box.
roxykattx 1 month ago
@roxykattx
mate, he is a troll, did you not see the nick ?
0puest0 1 month ago
Comment removed
SAVSAV1212 2 months ago
Well, the Germans also had training to do monstrous things with the Jews, Soviet prisoners, Roma, Turks, Arabs, and so on. Friend the Nazis miserable trained to hell with Satan and were
Felipebrazil101 2 months ago
Lots of miscalculations in this doc, germans had 0.7 million men, russians had almost 2 million, germans had 3000 tanks and russians had little more than 5000, germans had 10000 guns, russians 25000, germans had 2510 aircraft and russians had almost 3000. But the russian number advantage wasnt so "advantageous" when put against the german soldiers experience and training.
asadparvez2 2 months ago
Germany didnt lose my friends, it was america that forced germany to divide its resources between two fronts that caused german retreat in Russia. In the northern part of kursk, the german forces were halted, but due to german attack beginning one hour bf4 planned in the south, the russians were getting pounded and were almost at the brink of defeat when hitler took out some of germanys main tank divisions and sent them to italy and france.
asadparvez2 2 months ago
@asadparvez2 Fearing loss of Italy, Hitler warned FM Manstein on 13th July that WSS formations might have to leave Kursk, but FM M misleads us when he says success was snatched from him by Hitler's decision to break off Citadel: contemporary records make it clear that the offensive was not broken off (and no final decision taken to remove WSS) until 25th July, by which time it was certain Citadel had failed and that Soviet counter strokes to the rear of German attack areas had begun
elrjames777 2 months ago
@asadparvez2 I agree what you say about Hoth's decision to attack early, because the 'Lucy' spy ring only operated effectively at Fuhrer HQ level and had no way of leaking to the Soviets any moves that German field commanders planned and implemented themselves on their own initiative. Incidentally, this incident is probably a last example of Hitler allowing his commanders in the field any sort of meaningful autonomy not only at a strategic, but at quite a low operational level :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
@elrjames777 and guess what, if hitler did that through the whole war, we would be nazis right now.
asadparvez2 2 months ago
@asadparvez2 Yes: maybe so: but, although I take no acception what-so-ever to your comment, it is simply an indication of a retrospective political disposition, rather than analysis of alternative or actual past events :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
Northern pincer didn't do very well, in the South however, Soviet tank casualties were enormous, almost 10:1 kill ratio.
otester 2 months ago
@otester Yes: even the Ferdinand assault gun broke through Soviet lines on the first day and took a terrible toll of their armour before it became less effective due to mechanical breakdown, and also because Red Army infantrymen discovered it had no machine guns and was therefore vulnerable to their magnetic mines attached to the sides of the hull or casemate :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
They should release a soundtrack for this show ;(
Master91474 3 months ago
The British ultra code breakers had warned Ivan about the attack on Kursk months before, we even told them the start time so Ivan could pound the start lines of the Germans for an hour! Thats never mentioned though. Russias man power wearing down Germanys best divisions and the British code breakers defeated Germany!
chainedtoaradiator 3 months ago
@chainedtoaradiator Nope: it was the 'Lucy' spy ring, not 'Ultra': also, the Soviet pre-emptive bombardment was far less effective on the southern 'Citadel' pincer because Col Gen Hoth made the decision on his own initiative to begin his attack earlier than originally planned :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
it seems ironic how the Germans with their high tech knowledge lost in the face of a country like RUssia :))
TaviYamato 3 months ago
@TaviYamato
You don't seem to know much about Russian WW2 technology and doctrines, do you?
In 41 Russians had much more advanced tanks (t34, KV1), by the end of war - matcing quality (IS, ISU) with much lower price. Only in 43, when mass Tigers\Panthers were met in Kursk, germans had an edge.
1alexisneverlate1 2 months ago
@1alexisneverlate1 In 41 most Soviet tank formations consisted of obsolescent BT7's: the T34 and KV1 were only just appearing in significant numbers: Moreover, prior to hugely increased lend lease deliveries in 44, they had on average only 1 radio for every 20 vehicles. On the other hand, German command and control communication was, and continued to be, excellent. Also, a Tiger's 88mm L71 cannon could knock out even a T34/85 at distances well beyond its accurate firing range.
elrjames777 2 months ago
@elrjames777
What you're saying is certainly true, although i somehow miss the point.
In 41 - most of 20 000 soviet tanks were outdated - but matched the 3000 pz2, and pz3 counterparts. 2000 of 20 0000 were t34 and Kv, with all their problems - were unmatched.
t3485 - as precicely written, being far inferior to tiger\panther etc, had uncomparible production values, and was very effective as a weapon against much more advanced and superior (in price) tanks. +Tanks are not created to fight tanks.
1alexisneverlate1 2 months ago
@1alexisneverlate1 Sorry if I wasn't clear: another example is that in the opening stages of 'Barbarossa' six soviet mechanized tanks corps (consisting in large part of the advanced T34 / KV1 machines you mentioned) attacked en mass in a pincer movement against PZ Grp 1 at Dubno: although the Soviets inflicted heavy losses they were outmaneuvred mainly due to a paucity of effective radio communication: the Germans emerged capable of further offensive action the Soviets did not
elrjames777 2 months ago
@elrjames777
Organisation structure of German army was, indeed, unmatched. Not only due to the lack of radio, but the education level etc. etc. etc. What i was mostly trying to say, is that the soviet technological doctrine (which has its backgrounds of course), turned out to be more effective than the german one - in the end. (which had its background as well) and the t34 is merely a symbol of this doctrine.
1alexisneverlate1 2 months ago
@1alexisneverlate1 which doctrine did you have in mind ? :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
The battle was compromised by Intelligence services. Russians were informed by an English spy (Ultra decoded) & constructed deep defences of 200km. Nazis had lack in intelligence. Manstein suggested Hitler to attack on May before Russian preparations. Hitler wanted to wait Tigers and Panthers till July & prevaled delaying. Hitler was a military idiot, better this way, & excpelled many of his maggior Generals, while Stalin did not since 1942 and on. They should have made peace & rescue lives...
rommelervin 3 months ago
@rommelervin Soviets were informed by 'Lucy' spy ring not British 'Ultra' decoders. Also, the blame for Zitadelle's failure is not entirely Hitler's: OKW staff (even field commanders like Model) were well aware of RA build up, but postponed thinking these would be destroyed confident that their new weapons would break through. Hitler was hardly "a military idiot", but he became increasingly divorced from reality and unwilling even to listen to opinions which disagreed with his own.
elrjames777 2 months ago
@elrjames777 @elrjames777 Maybe you are % more right about Lucy. But still is a debate about the source of the Lucy ring. It is clamed the source was Ultra. I had this in mind while writing. The failure of Zitadelle is not entirely Hitler's, but his was the one to give the orders which eventually would prevale above any other view of matters. That he was an IDIOT it is my personal opinion. Not only by a military view, in which his exceeded but in many other sectors. Good evening.
rommelervin 2 months ago
@rommelervin The only debate is on 'Wikikpedia' which is not exactly the best historical authority on the topic. In reality, the Lucy information to the Soviets came directly from OKW headquarters via Switzerland and not from Enigma messages decoded by 'Ultra' at Bletchley Park. Evidence for this is that following the 20th July 44 bomb plot, Gen Fellgieble (head of communications) and Hans Oster (Chief of Staff military intelligence) were arrested and the flow of information ceased.
elrjames777 2 months ago
@elrjames777 Yes the only debate is there on the net, since In a history Periodic Illusttation I posses concerning the Kursk Battle, it was clearly stated that the information flow came from ultra and throught some spy. The bibliography of that illustration is vast. So I do not know the original source of this info.
Is the proof you put on the table an unshackable one? Cause after a plot security misures are up. Proof? There wasn't any more plots...
rommelervin 2 months ago
@rommelervin What is the "periodic illustration" you possess that informs us 'Lucy' warnings to Soviets about 'Citadel' came from 'Ultra' decodes and not directly from OKW via Switzerland: it wouldn't be unsourced speculators weekly by any chance would it :-) Statements like "vast bibliography" are nebulous, meaningless and unhelpful; one authoritative source will do which, by your own admission, you "do not know". Try: VE Tarrant 'Red Orchestra' or memoirs of Gen Reinhard Gehlen
elrjames777 2 months ago
@elrjames777 Do be so sure. I stated VAST in confrontation of what Youtube aloud me to post. Sources of illustration, I mention only writers, no space for books: Eddy Beyer, MArtin Caidin, Alan Clark, Robin Cross, Phil GrasbySiegfried Knappe, Sir Basil Hart, Bryan Perret, Robin Lumsden, Gordon Williamson, Georgi K. Zhukov plus some w w w sites. Here is a reference for british Lucy and enigma "h t t p : // atethepaint . blogspot . com / 2010 / 05 / battle-of-kursk_19 . html"
rommelervin 2 months ago
@rommelervin ....Hey Mr. Wizard, it's "allowed" and not "aloud" you fucking retard. Ever heard of a dictionary, you fucking moron??!!
superhornet69 2 months ago
Comment removed
rommelervin 2 months ago
@superhornet69 Ever heard about foreigners in the NW Pacific where you live?
I can speak and write 4 modern languages + 1 ancient.
That explains some of my mistakes in your language.
If the definition of retard or moron is not knowing a foreign launguage 100%, then don't check out your own shoes...cause you might caught up in an astonishing surprise for your arrogance.
Marry Christmas.
Mr Wizard
rommelervin 2 months ago
@rommelervin ...Oh so you're from Greece, well that explains it. My apologies...Merry Christmas, sorry I yelled at you.
superhornet69 2 months ago
@superhornet69
That's ok Mister.
Apologies well accepted.
God bless +++
rommelervin 2 months ago
@superhornet6 Probably not moronic: more likely the familiar over politicized and stubborn viewpoint of the east European of ex communist background :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
@rommelervin None on this list of yours, which purport to be the sources of your unsubstantiated assertion, adduce any direct evidence that the Lucy spy ring was subordinated to, an integral part of, or in any way connected to the allied 'Ultra' code breaking operations. The fact is that information the Soviets received about a forthcoming offensive against their Kursk salient did not come from decoded intercepts of German 'Enigma' messages at Bletchley Park :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
@elrjames777 In this illustration there is a name stated for this british spy who feeded russians from enigma along with this "Lucy ring" but it is not written in english, so I do not know excaclty the name. Should be "Alexander Foot"? Really dont know which book of all is the source of this name. Sorry.
rommelervin 2 months ago
@elrjames777 OK: thanks for the info: I shall try to research it: good luck to you my friend :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
@rommelervin Had Hitler (both as supreme commander of the German armed forces and army commander in chief) had strong "views of the matter" then they certainly would have "prevailed". The reality is, however, that he merely chose from the conflicting options about 'Citadel' pressed upon him either by his HQ staff or commanders in the field: Zeitzler conceived the idea, Guderian warned of a potential "death ride": Model wanted to delay the operation, Manstein urged an attack at once.
elrjames777 2 months ago
@elrjames777 Yes, as you say. HE MADE his choise [he was in charge], as always, even if he was unsure about the attack. He was unsure even for the war at this point but realizing it, was meaning realizing his own end. That is why he kept on pushing. That is why I consider him an idiot. Destryed German nation and other people just to keep his ass alife.
rommelervin 2 months ago
@rommelervin Perhaps the "other sectors" you had in mind were the deflection of valuable manpower and communication resources away from Army use in pursuit of racial and gender policies which could only harm the war effort: German women were restricted from working in industry and certain races and nationalities were not only precluded from voluntarily assisting the Reich, but actually persecuted by it; from a purely military standpoint this probably can be considered as idiotic :-)
elrjames777 2 months ago
What the fuck... When ya were soldier in this time, you had a shit life... Fuck off nazis
MrPillepalle341 3 months ago
@2:57 absolutely! no tank was better then the t-34.........well exsept (takes deep breath) the tiger,panther,m26 pershing,sherman firefly and not to mention the king tiger!
coolkid123456100 3 months ago
@coolkid123456100
T34 was made in 1939 - introduced a perfect balance between mobility, armor, firepower and production values. (like 20 t34 cost like 1 tiger and takes 10 times faster to build). It was a "soldier tank", backbone of war.
All others you mention, might be better in some aspects, but with all those characteristics combined - far behind. And are all created years later and had their advanced matches in their time, as t3485, IS2 etc.
1alexisneverlate1 2 months ago 5
@1alexisneverlate1 yo russia won the war for west and now shutup
ifty44 1 month ago
@PhilosopherGaming your wrong! heinz guderian was preparing a panzer army that he said would be ready for a major offencive in 1944 on the eastern front, but as usual Hitler interviened and launched an attack at kusk.Therefore guderians re-arming was wasted.
coolkid123456100 3 months ago
@coolkid123456100 Guderian had, de facto, his own private army equivalent to Himmler's WSS or Goering's LFD's, but why Hitler separated command of motorized troops from the rest of the Army is hard to say: Guderian was elevated to a position no less important than Hitler's chiefs of staff (Jodl + Zeitzler) with whom he should have worked in co-operation: in fact, each of them disliked the others: no other combat nation offered so diverse a command organization for ground troops
elrjames777 2 months ago
which game is it?:D
neiswestnij 3 months ago
this battle would not have happened in the hands of a skilled commander although a skilled commander would not have attacked russia in the first place
lol what a dumbfuck hitler was
coolkid123456100 3 months ago
@coolkid123456100
Hitler had no choice. If he wouldnt make a surprise attack, he could not have any opportunity to defend against the vast russian army later.
1alexisneverlate1 2 months ago
Holy crap this looks so much like World of Tanks :D
iHateSpoilerz 3 months ago
By early 1943 Hitler had long-then taken over a self-appointed role as hands-on master tactician of Germany's land war in Russia & had already sacked the best of Germany's Barbarossa Generals, including the incomparable Guderian. Hitler, the amateur fool, by then was the best thing the Allies had going for them. The German Brass vetoed this disastrous battle .. Hitler stupidly overuled them. Had the German Army NOT conducted this battle .. who knows how the Russian Front may have turned out.
colindominy 3 months ago
@colindominy to be honest I dont think it would have changed the conclusion of the russian front if kursk had never taken place, the german thrust had stalled and so many cock ups had been made before then that i doubt germany could ever have regained the momentum, though i guess with those lost tanks they could at least have held on a while longer or made the russiam advance more difficult
PhilosopherGaming 3 months ago
@colindominy While it is true that Hitler had "taken over" the post of army commander in chief in addition to the office of commander in chief of the German armed forces, the "German brass", as you call them, were far from united in their opinion: it was Zietzler's idea but Guderian opposed it, Manstein wished an immediate attack but Model wanted to delay: Hitler merely chose from the options forced upon him by his own staff and field commanders: he chose badly rather than foolishly
elrjames777 2 months ago
I dont think the armys rushed into eachother like that.
coldnexusfrontline 3 months ago
all you guys do know that both germany and ussr at the battle of kursk.. would have gotten their asses kicked by one or two jedis.......
etornel79 3 months ago
@etornel79 Well, that goes without saying. WWII could have been stopped in under 30 minutes by 1 or 2 jedi....
JuicyMullet1 3 months ago